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.

And yet a certain member, and a few others, still claim the new Codex is more flexible.

I just don't get it.

Polonius:
I salute you,
that captures a lot of what goes unsaid about this codex, really does

Polonius wrote:And you didn't feel like fielding them as hardened veterans, basic infantry squads, conscripts, last chancers, or even kroot mercenaries in the IG 4th ed book? Or Penal legion, veterans, conscripts, or standard infantry squads in the current book?

I tried to make them work in the 3.5 book, but at the end of the day it was too complicated for opponents. I had lots of models with laspistol/CCW and shotguns, and things like heavy stubbers and heavy plasma guns.

In the new book it would work alot better, sadly I've sold off much of the army now.

Rygoth wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:Meh,

The haters will still hate, the ones who like it will still like it. We aren't going to change one an others minds. It is not the worst codex ever, that award goes to 3.5 Chaos codex for the reasons I laid out. People like H have the exact opposite view.

I just find it laughable that in 2nd ed. NL and IW and WE's was a paint job. The worst thing GW did was to give CSM armies other than the big 4 their own rules.

SM's have 5 army lists or codeciies but CSM players feel that Chaos should have 9? How is 9 vs 5 fair. We can have 5 as well you know? 1 BL/non-cult in one book (using named characters to unlock IW or NL or WE archetypes and then 4 Cult codeciies but for some reason all I see is that all 9 Legions should have their own codex. Meh, I'm sorry. The day all 9 Legions get a codex is the day I want to see CF/IF/RG/Sals/WS get their own codeciies as well.

Yeesh, talk about wanting the whole fething Ben and Jerry's ice cream factory instead of more than 3 flavors of ice cream.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Samus666 wrote:Gotta say, H.B.M.C. I'm right there with ya. My opinion of the this 'dex is about as low as it could possibly be. There's not much could change that, and illogical excuses from the credited creator just makes it worse. As does having the fringe 4th ed supoorters constantly trying to shout down its detractors.
Fact is, if the majority of Chaos players feel there is a problem with this book, then there IS a problem with the book. To those who do not have problems with this book, I'm happy for you. But please don't keep telling us we're wrong. Because there are only a limited number of ways to evaluate a codex objectively - popularity, expansiveness, flexibility, balance, competitiveness, fluffiness - and it seems that in most cases C:CSM 4th edition fails on all fronts. The fact that it is tolerable by some and actually pleased a few by chance doesn't change that.

Also, I wanna mention that if I ever have to 'go 4th' (which might happen if my regular gaming buddy drops out of the hobby), or ever decide to so I can play in stores again (which I'd really like to) the addition of a legions book will not help me. I play Black Legion mostly, and the 4th edition codex isnt even suitable for something as generic as that. I want to be able to customize my Lords and Daemon Princes and Chosen and Tactical Squads - turn them into unique and legendary warriors and killers and conquerors. Without skills, marks, wargear, gifts etc I can't. Plus, I refuse to use generic daemons - I'd get no satisfaction from playing those rules at all.

This...because somehow you KNOW that 51% of Chaos players in the world HATE the 4.5 codex. Being part of the vocal majority doesn't put you in the OVERALL majority. If you can't prove you have talked to each and every Chaos player in the known world and gotten their opinion on the codex than you have no ground to stand on. Saying "but all the Chaos players in my group" hate the codex does not make your group the majority.

Unless somehow your group happens to contain every 40k CSM player in the known world which I know very much is not true.

B.S. At some point, overwhelming observational evidence has got to be taken into account. All the chaos armies in my area have been shelved. Once you know someones only real build is dual lash, they tend to be countered fairly easily, they have less fun playing, and they move on. This is a theme I see repeated over and over. Drink the kool aid all you want, Chaos was gutted almost as badly as the Dark Angels were.

Again, PROVE to me that 51% of the Chaos Space Marine players ON THIS PLANET hate the 4.5 codex and I will personally come to your house and kiss your feet. I'll even allow you the courtesy of a 3% margin of error. You can't do it so I call BS on your claim that ALL CSM players hate the 4.5 codex. Can you prove to me that all CSM armies in your area have been shelved? What is your area? Your local FLGS? Your 'hood? Your city? Your state? You do realize that maybe not everyone who plays 40k in whatever city you happen to live in plays at your FLGS? Maybe there are as many people who play 40k in their basement that play CSM's as do at the FLGS you play at.

Your "evidence" is no more concrete than mine that say's most CSM players "like" the new CSM 'dex. 2 CSM players in my group, I and another guy. Both of us like it. He has my army because I sold it to him BECAUSE of the atrocity that was the 3.5 (see what I did there all you 4.5 haters, I can use words like atrocity as well?) CSM codex. If I decide to rebuild my WE army it will be a feth load better than it was in 3.5. In MY area, from what I know, every CSM players "likes" the 4.5 codex. Hmm, I can get anecdotal too, does not mean I'm anymore right than you.

But go on and keep standing on your soapbox. I'll even provide you with a bulletproof shield on wheels and a wireless mic so you can keep preaching to the choir and maybe at the same time travel the world, going door to door to prove me wrong. Not that you can so I'm not worried.

I'm not saying older CSM armies did NOT lose something. I realize you lost Cult Terminators and special rules. I'm not a fethwit but to try to tell those of us who like the 4.5 codex that "we don't know what it's like because we are new or drinking the koolaid GW gives us is an insult." and an attack at the same time. I lost stuff from the supposed garbage 3.0 codex to 3.5 so don't belittle me by saying I don't know what it's like.

Fateweaver wrote:Again, PROVE to me that 51% of the Chaos Space Marine players ON THIS PLANET hate the 4.5 codex and I will personally come to your house and kiss your feet.

Oh give it a rest Fateweaver! Of course he can't 'prove' that, but he doesn't have to prove your red-herring either.

Honestly...

Well,
I could prove it statistically if we had enough traffic, just need enough of a sample on the poll and you can extrapolate based on estimated sizes for the gaming population.

I do this all the time in marketing and econometrics,
not very tough stats people,
just need the numbers...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
NB: This is all margin of error type thinking, I think that the empirical evidence really is all that is needed.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:Again, PROVE to me that 51% of the Chaos Space Marine players ON THIS PLANET hate the 4.5 codex and I will personally come to your house and kiss your feet.

Oh give it a rest Fateweaver! Of course he can't 'prove' that, but he doesn't have to prove your red-herring either.

Honestly...

I'll give it a rest when you give it a rest in spouting your BS about how the 4.5 codex is the worst ever because you cannot prove it anymore than I can prove it isn't.

You might have been a member here longer so I'm sure your cut-to-the-chase rhetoric and thinly veiled attacks will fly by most of the mods compared to if I posted in the same manner as you but whatever.

Again, just to make it clear to you since apparently your eyes are so red from 4.5 codex rage that you can't see what I'm posting I'll repeat it.

Not everyone, and that has been shown with this poll, hates the 4.5 CSM codex. In YOUR opinion it is the worst codex to have been released ever by GW. Your opinion is NOT fact. As much as you like to pretend it is, it isn't. You are not the only person who feels a codex has made their army not fun or that the codex in general is NOT fun. You say the 4.5 codex did this, I say the 3.5 codex did it for me and I am not the only one who has said this.

I will not concede to you as consent means I accept defeat. None of the haters can prove to me that the majority of Chaos players hate it. I can pull numbers out of my donkey-cave and say "look everyone, 74% of the CSM players in the world love 4.5" but it's not possible to prove so should not even be taken into consideration.

If I get a warning for this post, so be it. I and JHDD get thinly veiled (and I mean thinly as it's obvious they are personal and ad hominem) attacks made against us for not agreeing. So be it. Slinging mud back will only result in me getting a warning and would bring me down to the level of those attacking me. Go on thinking GW a bunch of fethwits and I'll go on drinking the hypothetical kool-aid as you so elegantly pointed out I am doing. Oh, fyi HBMC, the kool-aid is Cherry. OH YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that."

Fateweaver wrote:I'll give it a rest when you give it a rest in spouting your BS about how the 4.5 codex is the worst ever because you cannot prove it anymore than I can prove it isn't.

Do you practice sounding like a 6-year-old?

Fateweaver wrote:Oh, fyi HBMC, the kool-aid is Cherry. OH YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh. That'd be a 'yes' then.



When you've levelled up a bit and invested from skill points in 'coherent argument construction' and 'logic', rather than pumping them into 'internet troll powers', get back to me...

I'm only on my phone so I can't respond as in depth as I'd like, that'll come tomorrow. I will say that fateweaver accuses HBMC of attacking him personally and HBMC responds by attacking him personally. Nice.

Ozymandias wrote:Wow, way to respond. I wasn't hot-headed but I'm starting to be now. Geez, I have the gall to ask you a simple question and you respond by calling me snotty and hot-headed? Coming from one of the snottiest and most hot-headed poster on Dakka no less.

Now, how about answering the fething question?

I most definitely have to agree with this. H.B.M.C., while you are interesting, post good reads, and are generally in the right place with your opinions... For you to call someone else snotty and hot-headed, that has got to me one of the most hypocritical posts I have ever seen from you. Step back and take a look at yourself and what you've been saying in its entirety, or ask someone else to if you can't. Otherwise you're no better than any of the other posters you traditionally label as hypocrites yourself.

Personal attack because I don't buy into your BS. I won't report it as it won't do any good.

What do you want me to say to you? That yes I agree with your logic? I'd rather go emo and slit my own wrist with an electric shaver.

How does telling me to give it a rest make your posts logical but when I do it you call me a 6yo with no logic skills? 2 personal attacks in one post. Wow, I'd be banned if I did that.

I replied with logic and thought. You just reply to anyone who disagrees with you about the 4.5 codex with insults and attacks.

What don't you understand H? I know you don't like the 4.5 codex and I respect your opinion on why you don't like it but that is just it, it's your opinion. Fact: It is a WH40k codex. Opinion: It is the worst one ever. Opinion =/= Fact. You seem to think your Opinion = Fact.

You asked those of us earlier who like it WHY we like it? Why the hell did you ask us if you are apparently going to ignore us or insult and attack us for "drinking the kool-aid?"

I have read your codex rewrites and I'm not all that impressed. You and your group might find them colorful and fun but I don't care for them. I say that not with prejudice because I read them before I found out just how acidic your personality is. Does the fact I don't like them make them the worst codeciies ever? No because you and others like them so therefore my opinion =/= fact. Why is it so damn hard for you and others like you to understand?

I'm on my 2nd glass of GW Kool-aid. I'm also sitting in my lawn chair looking at my CSM 4.5 codex with GW's new Rose-colored glasses. Hmmm, I just flipped open the 3.5 Chaos codex. Ah yes, it is all so clear to me now with my new glasses how good the 3.5 codex actually was. Goddamn, I'm sorry H. I apologize profusely for doubting your wisdom.

See what I did there? Ad hominem or personal on my part? Your pick H but right now you are leading me in insults and attacks.

How else should I respond Ozy? Besides, you should know by now that my incredulity (and the method in which I have expressed that) is direct towards Fateweaver's manner and his strange need to post nonsense rather than actual well-formed arguments (as a lot of people in this thread who disagree with me have managed to do quite well) as opposed to just attacking him directly (as he has done).

So, please, spare me the 'pot/kettle/black' speech. It doesn't apply.

Neconilis wrote:For you to call someone else snotty and hot-headed, that has got to me one of the most hypocritical posts I have ever seen from you.

Then you clearly haven't read that many of my posts.

it's at least 20%,
but that's last weeks figs.

Fate, dude. If you are going to swear, at least do so with feth like the rest of us, your just asking for a butt whipping by doing that.

And no,
HBMC argument is based on HEAPS of empirical evidence and the fact that this thread even exists, yours is not. And the poll continues to show that


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hmm,
this has gone from the ivory tower to the street,
come on, pick up the level of thought guys (and maybe gals )

HBMC's opinion is extreme, and it's not one that I really agree with, but he does understand that what happened to Chaos was different than other books.

He's not going to convince anybody of his viewpoint, because it's a very personal dislike. What his personal dislike is grounded in is an understanding of not only how this chaos book was dissimilar from previous chaos books, but as time has shown how it is dissimilar from the other 4.5 and 5th ed books that have come since.

As long as people keep claiming that the 4.5 chaos book was no different than any other change, you're going to provoke the reaction.

I'm not saying the s4.5 is a travesty or anything, but find me another codex switch that turned 13 units into 2, made no effort to reproduce old sublists, and added as few new units as Chaos, and we can talk.

You can argue that the changes were good, and I'd hear that out, but the extent of the changes were unprecedented.

Polonius:
That's kinda the point, and well said.

But put that statement in a vacuum
(I'm not saying the s4.5 is a travesty or anything, but find me another codex switch that turned 13 units into 2, made no effort to reproduce old sublists, and added as few new units as Chaos, and we can talk. )

And I think you would get a very high proportion of "Why would they be so dumb" type repsonses

Fateweaver wrote:I know you don't like the 4.5 codex and I respect your opinion on why you don't like it but that is just it, it's your opinion.

Do you though?

See, when I say that I dislike the Chaos Codex, I provide reasons for it. Lengthy, detailed reasons that I put a lot of thought into because I don't like saying things without backing myself up. I provide examples. Analogies. Metaphors. Anything to make it easier for people to understand where I'm coming from. When my opinions are challenged I expect the person challenging them to be able to come up with valid reasons why they disagree with me. It's not as simple as saying "Everyone can have an opinion" because frankly that's a load of horsesh!t. I can claim that it's my opinion that the sky is orange but unless I can back up my opinion with something, I'm just going to get laughed at. "It is because I think it is" isn't a valid opinion or argument.

So far, I've heard a lot of "You haven't lost flexibility because you just haven't" and "The new Codex is more flexible/allows more variety than the old because it just does" or perhaps the classic "There were too many options that nobody used", in other words, a lot of faith-based assertions that are supposed to exist on their own without any form of supporting statement or, worse, exist as reasons why the new is better than the old. The problem here is that these statements aren't opinions, they're questioning facts (flexibility and lost options aren't opinions, they're absolutes) and, as I said, they have no form of supporting or qualifying statement to accompany them beyond "Well it's just my opinion" or "Because I said so!".

You cited your World Eaters, specifically the Blood Rage rule which ruined how you used the army between 3 to 3.5. I say that's a remarkably petty reason to hate a Codex, especially when the World Eaters were simply one of 9 different parts of that book. Now the World Eaters aren't even a part of the book - sure, they don't have Blood Rage, but they don't have an army either. I'd call that a loss. I play World Eaters as well, and Death Guard. Neither were very good. I didn't hate the Codex for it.

I don't care if you (and this is the general 'you', not you) disagree with me as long as you can back what you say. Even if you hated the old Codex and love the new one, claiming that the new one is more flexible/has greater variety, or that Chaos players haven't 'lost' anything is false.

Fateweaver wrote:You asked those of us earlier who like it WHY we like it? Why the hell did you ask us if you are apparently going to ignore us or insult and attack us for "drinking the kool-aid?"

You're the one who brought kool-aid into this, or someone else replying to you. Don't get your Dakka posters confused.

As to why you like it, that's fine. You like it. That's great. Some people dislike the Witch Hunter Codex for sidelining or shoe-horning Sisters into another army, whereas I love the Witch Hunter Codex. Some people hate the Marine Codex for bringing Vulkan-Spam to the game, I love the book even with its faults. And that's fine we can all have those opinions. My issue isn't that you like it, it's that you ('you' being the general 'you', not you you) seem to want to tell me that I'm wrong for not liking it, and the asinine reasons behind that.

Fateweaver wrote:I have read your codex rewrites and I'm not all that impressed.

And what's that got to do with anything?

Fateweaver wrote:I'm on my 2nd glass of GW Kool-aid.

And I just drank a 5th of Vodka. Dare me to drive?

Fateweaver wrote:I'm also sitting in my lawn chair looking at my CSM 4.5 codex with GW's new Rose-colored glasses. Hmmm, I just flipped open the 3.5 Chaos codex. Ah yes, it is all so clear to me now with my new glasses how good the 3.5 codex actually was. Goddamn, I'm sorry H. I apologize profusely for doubting your wisdom.

Spare me...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Polonius wrote:As long as people keep claiming that the 4.5 chaos book was no different than any other change, you're going to provoke the reaction.

There we are. Polonius got it in one.

Makaleth wrote:it's at least 20%,
but that's last weeks figs.

Fate, dude. If you are going to swear, at least do so with feth like the rest of us, your just asking for a butt whipping by doing that.

And no,
HBMC argument is based on HEAPS of empirical evidence and the fact that this thread even exists, yours is not. And the poll continues to show that


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hmm,
this has gone from the ivory tower to the street,
come on, pick up the level of thought guys (and maybe gals )

I'll edit in a minute as the filter didn't pick it up.

To any mods, I'll edit in a few mins.

Did you not read what I posted? Did they not teach reading comp. in school? HBMC does not have FACTS to go on but OPINIONS. I don't give a damn if 999 out of 1,000 people BELIEVE the csm 4.5 codex is garbage. 1 person saying otherwise does not make it so. Opinion =/= Fact. End of story. I say 3.5 CSM codex was garbage. It is not fact because not everyone agrees with me obviously.

It is my opinion that some posters on Dakka and Warseer and BoLS (or Taco Bell in H's world) do not know how to read and comprehend words put in front of them. That does not mean it is FACT (although I am beginning to wonder if it is indeed factual).

It is really funny that HBMC calls Ozy a hot head when so far he has gone on for at least 4 pages since Gav replied to him doing nothing but insult GW and Gav personally and anyone else who is not looking at the 3.5 codex with rose colored glasses.

Gav did not have to answer to anyone about why the 4.5 codex is the way it is. Had the codex caused the death of someones infant child due to a safety defect than he would have to answer to that infants family. The fact he even acknowledged Dakkas biggest cynic and pessimist when it comes to anything GW does should be good enough for that person (and he knows who he is).




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Okay H, I'll bite the hook this time.

I can't speak for others about why they don't like the 3.5 CSM codex.

Assuming I had kept my army I agree I would not have gotten my juggernaughts back or Cult terminators. WE's were fun in 2nd back when CSM's were basically what CSM's are now. Black Legion with access to Cult Marines. In 3.0 it got some flavor with Jugger units and vets with marks that did more than just +1 attack, not sure what else as I don't have the 3.0 dex anymore.

Than 3.5 rolls around. I lost some stuff and gained others. Zerkers gained Chainaxes, although frankly they were OTT and I didn't feel like ripping a bunch of weapons off to make things WYSIWYG so never actually paid points for them. Lost juggernaughts and had to put all Zerkers on foot instead of Rhinos (which 4th didn't alleviate the problem of them being death traps) had I wanted to keep my Juggers and reglue the champs back onto them (yeah I actually kept the champs for later use just in case) but I still had 8 too many so best case scenario I would have had to sell some or shelve them.

Khornate cult terminators. Okay, cool but pricy. Hmm, lost the option for Havocs so those got made into Chosen meaning I had no reliable HS outside of Defilers and they sucked IMO so didn't want any in my army.

Then when I got the army list made, rejigged stuff I actually played a game. Wow, to say I have more fun getting my teeth drilled is an understatement. As boring and lame as you say the 4.5 codex is I say the same about the 3.5 codex.

Let's be civil. I just laid out why I don't like the 3.5 codex, in a simple and constructive manner. 4.5 is not fun to you, 3.5 was not fun for me. To say that I lost less than you might be fact or your opinion but please don't insinuate I'm a fanboi of anything GW does because I happen to like something of theirs you don't like. I have issues with the current Eldar codex (and no it is not because of the CWE loss either).

I threw in the part about your Codeciies because your insults toward GW not knowing how to write a codex are opinion as in my opinion you aren't much of a codex designer either. Not trying to be an ass, I'm just stating my opinion.

Wow,
Ok, fact would have to be overwhelming majority in this sense.

It's like saying someone landed on the moon,
there are detractors, but doesn't make it less fact that 100% of people do not agree that this is true.

In terms of an internet rant,
I don't think we ever discuss anything that is 100% on way or the other very long, but the majority rules (or at least that's how it usually works)

Whatever Mak. I'm done arguing with you and H and the other haters.

You think 4.5 is an atrocity, I don't think it is and you won't change my mind.

Let it go man, let it go.

Majority opinion does not make something FACT but whatever.

Fateweaver wrote:Whatever Mak. I'm done arguing with you and H and the other haters.

You think 4.5 is an atrocity, I don't think it is and you won't change my mind.

Let it go man, let it go.

Majority opinion does not make something FACT but whatever.

The thing that needs to be kept in mind is the difference between personal feelings about a codex, and an over all appraisal. When the 3.5 codex came out, your army got nerfed. It wasn't illegal or completely unusuable, but Juggernauts were really bad and the berzerkers didn't play the way you wanted them to. that happens pretty fairly frequently with codex changes.

What I'm arguing is that if you look past your own experience, you'll see that the change to Chaos 4.5 did what Chaos 3.5 did to you, and worse, and to more people than most codexes.

You made a single demon type a big part of your army in 3.0. Anybody that made demons a big part of their army in 3.5 got screwed. You had a bunch of Berzerkers stop playing the way you wanted them too. Anybody with Alpha Legion infiltrators, stealthy Night lords, a word bearer demon bomb, or anything with veteran skills feels the same way.

So the point I'm trying to make is that this change was rougher than most. It really did screw more people, and harder, than most other new codexes. It doesn't change your experience, or mean their suffering is some how more valid than yours, but it there is a reason there's more vitriol pointed at this book than most.

Again,
Polonius is on the money.
"What I'm arguing is that if you look past your own experience, you'll see that the change to Chaos 4.5 did what Chaos 3.5 did to you, and worse, and to more people than most codexes."

I would also be of the opinion that this was the biggest one of the codecies that I had experience with.

Also,
I don't think that I am a hater (I could be wrong).

Fate.
No issues
I love codex in terms of art and reading.
But I thought the rules and design of the legion were the worst so far, with some bright spots.

Finally we have agreed to disagree.

I'm done. I like the new codex enough to build an army around it (although I'm gonna start Tau so who knows if I'll get one done before the next Chaos codex).

Adios.

No hard feelings guys. Sometimes it's fun to exercise a little brain power in a debate, even against people who sometimes act like fethwits.

Fateweaver wrote:(or Taco Bell in H's world)

Oh pfft! I'm not the first person to call BoLS 'Taco Bell' and I certainly won't be the last. That's not a judgement of them either - I visit BoLS almost every other day to see what they've got cooking up.

Fateweaver wrote:It is really funny that HBMC calls Ozy a hot head

He was being a hot-head, and I wasn't the first to see that. Polonius was. It was actually odd, as Ozy is usually more level-headed.

Fateweaver wrote:...when so far he has gone on for at least 4 pages since Gav replied to him doing nothing but insult GW and Gav personally and anyone else who is not looking at the 3.5 codex with rose colored glasses.

Except I haven't. Stating that Gav's answer was a load of crap is very different to calling Gav a load of crap. Learn the difference.

Fateweaver wrote:Gav did not have to answer to anyone about why the 4.5 codex is the way it is.

And, what? I should be thankful that he did?

Fateweaver wrote: Had the codex caused the death of someones infant child due to a safety defect than he would have to answer to that infants family.

Hyperbolic nonsense won't score you any points. Neither will meaningless red herrings.

Fateweaver wrote: The fact he even acknowledged Dakkas biggest cynic and pessimist when it comes to anything GW does should be good enough for that person (and he knows who he is).

Again, so... what, exactly... should I be thankful? And I'm not Dakka's biggest pessimist - Aggy has that one down - I'm an eternal optimist, but I'm also a realist. I'm also very blunt, something you seem to have mistaken for acidity.

Fateweaver wrote:Okay H, I'll bite the hook this time.

You don't have to do me an favours...

Fateweaver wrote:Assuming I had kept my army I agree I would not have gotten my juggernaughts back or Cult terminators. WE's were fun in 2nd back when CSM's were basically what CSM's are now. Black Legion with access to Cult Marines. In 3.0 it got some flavor with Jugger units and vets with marks that did more than just +1 attack, not sure what else as I don't have the 3.0 dex anymore.

Than 3.5 rolls around. I lost some stuff and gained others. Zerkers gained Chainaxes, although frankly they were OTT and I didn't feel like ripping a bunch of weapons off to make things WYSIWYG so never actually paid points for them. Lost juggernaughts and had to put all Zerkers on foot instead of Rhinos (which 4th didn't alleviate the problem of them being death traps) had I wanted to keep my Juggers and reglue the champs back onto them (yeah I actually kept the champs for later use just in case) but I still had 8 too many so best case scenario I would have had to sell some or shelve them.

Khornate cult terminators. Okay, cool but pricy. Hmm, lost the option for Havocs so those got made into Chosen meaning I had no reliable HS outside of Defilers and they sucked IMO so didn't want any in my army.

Then when I got the army list made, rejigged stuff I actually played a game. Wow, to say I have more fun getting my teeth drilled is an understatement. As boring and lame as you say the 4.5 codex is I say the same about the 3.5 codex.

Ok. Fine. I can accept that. You have explained your reasoning (which is all I wanted) and to be perfectly honest I thought the way Khorne was handled in the in the previous Codex quite clumsy, resulting in serious flaws in the way World Eaters and Berzerkers in general played.

Fateweaver wrote: Let's be civil. I just laid out why I don't like the 3.5 codex, in a simple and constructive manner. 4.5 is not fun to you, 3.5 was not fun for me. To say that I lost less than you might be fact or your opinion but please don't insinuate I'm a fanboi of anything GW does because I happen to like something of theirs you don't like. I have issues with the current Eldar codex (and no it is not because of the CWE loss either).

And I have issues with the current Guard Codex, and it's not because of the loss of Doctrines (something I'm actually glad to see the back of).

Fateweaver wrote:... in my opinion you aren't much of a codex designer either. Not trying to be an ass, I'm just stating my opinion.

And this, right here, is my You think I'm 'not much of a Codex designer'. Ok... based on what? Because of why? This is my issue - it's not having the opinion (whatever the opinion may be) that bothers me, it's the stating of said opinion without any sort of qualifying statement. I could just as easily say "I think Polonius' username is dumb", and that would be my opinion (it isn't my opinion, but I'm making an example). The problem lies in the way I delivered that opinion. I haven't stated why I hold that opinion or or my chain of (hopefully logical) thought that led me to have that opinion, I've just stated it. How does anyone learn anything when I do such a thing? How does anyone respond to that with anything other than "Well... no it isn't!". I haven't explained why I hold the opinion, only that I hold it, so there's no further constructive conversation.

Now I'm not asking you to go into the reasons behind your statement above as this thread isn't about me (as much as some people have tried to make it about me), but I would ask that when you or anyone presents an opinion, explain why you hold the opinion (as you just did with your WE explanations). "I think the sky is orange" doesn't help anyone, it's an illogical statement of opinion. "I think the sky is orange because XYZ reasons..." is far more useful, as, right or wrong, it can be looked and and analysed.

I hope you can see what I'm getting at here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Polonius wrote:HBMC's opinion is extreme

Really? Is it? Cut out all my snarkiness and my usual blowing-it-out-of-proportion-on-purpose shtick and look at what I'm saying... the same thing as you. And given the overwhelming negative responce in threads such as this one, the ones that pop-up the proposed rules forum every now and again, the discussions we've had time and time again here, the recent poll KK posted with 50+ people voting 'bad' at last count, and do I really hold that extreme a view?

Sure, the way I present the view could be toned down - but that's half the fun, and as half my job here is to entertain people, and I seem to be doing that quite well, I don't see any reason to stop being who I am - but is the actual view itself 'extreme'? I'd use the word 'common' to describe my view of the Chaos Codex,

Honestly I think that there are three groups in this 'debate', the pro-Codex side, the anti-Codex side, and then the the overwhelming majority. Who are the overwhelming majority? They are the players (and opponents) that simply don't care. It's not a case of thinking that more people agree with me or more people agree with Fateweaver, but more a case of most people actually don't give a damn.

And that makes us special.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Ozy - What answer could he give to satisfy me? I suspect there's no answer he could give me that would satisfy me, but not because I'd simply disagree with him, but because he simply wouldn't answer the question. Just look at his response. He fethed up the ice-cream analogy to the point of absurdity - his response does not make any logical sense - and then spent the next 10 paragraphs harping on with a straw-filled false dilemma to prove a non-existent point.

If someone wants to disagree with me about the Chaos Codex (or anything), fine, but I operate under the assumption that someone backs up what they say with some sort of tangible or logical reasoning. This is why I often get into hissy fits with John, as that man is devoid of all logic and is incapable of mounting a structured argument. Gav did the same thing here - he answered criticism with hollow, empty and meaningless babble. I'm not satisfied because I wanted an answer - whatever that answer may turn out to be is largely irrelevant - but I got no answer. I got crap.

Obviously, you've never tried to talk to a German politician


And to be honest, I don't like the way this thread is drifting into hostility.

It is early, and I have to leave to go to work soon, so...

Actual Individual Warnings will not be sent out.

For now.

However, EVERYONE is strongly encouraged to take a deep breath, calm down, and follow the rules of Dakka.

In short, STOP the personal attacks (passive aggressive or not, thinly veiled or not, etc.).

Debate the point, and leave it at that.

If you CANNOT do that, DON'T post in this thread.

Consider this the "After this point, the hammer be will dropped" point of this thread.

What's the point Alpha? People aren't even listening to Polonius, and he's put things in the simplest terms possible that anyone could understand.

The Pro-Chaos Codex crowd here are just like the militant casual gamer crowd - you can't have a differing opinion to them, even with lengthy explanations as to why you hold that opinion, as just having an opinion that differs not only makes you wrong, but a bad person. And who's got time for that, honestly?

Alpharius wrote:Actual Individual Warnings will not be sent out.

Heh. Too late for that I'm afraid Alpha.

To sum up:

V3.5 Eldar: Sandwiches, Wraps and Burritos with Different fillings.

V4 Eldar: Sandwiches, Wraps and Burritos with x1/2 fillings. (in the way that Swordwind can only be built in an inefficient roundabout way and craftworld archetypes lost all their special rules)

V3.5 Chaos: Sandwiches, Wraps and Burritos with different fillings.

V4 Chaos: Burritos. All the fillings previously available are still mostly available... you can only put them in burritos though, whether it makes sense or not. (in the way that daemonbomb, infiltrators, cultists, firebase and super character chaos lists are not options in the new codex AND the cult armies lost all their special rules)

Im deffinetly in the "The current CSM codex is junk" crowd. Ive played Chaos since I was 15 (now 25) they were my first army, I loved being the bad guys, and they looked awesome to boot. Ive spent LOADS of money on them for GW. Then this codex came out, and I felt completely and totally let down. I never used demons, as personally i hated them, but they were even worse then before. Everything in this dex was just hogwash.
So you can add my name to the list of Chaos players that shelved the army instead of playing.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Polonius wrote:HBMC's opinion is extreme

Really? Is it? Cut out all my snarkiness and my usual blowing-it-out-of-proportion-on-purpose shtick and look at what I'm saying... the same thing as you. And given the overwhelming negative responce in threads such as this one, the ones that pop-up the proposed rules forum every now and again, the discussions we've had time and time again here, the recent poll KK posted with 50+ people voting 'bad' at last count, and do I really hold that extreme a view?

Extreme may have been the wrong word. I meant "hard line", in that you seem to carry the banner for the most complete dislike for the current book. Though, you have posted that you consider it decent for new players and for renegades, so your position is still nuanced.

Honestly, the comment was made with the hope that I could reach some people that were in full flame mode responding to you. The results were predictably bad.

Fateweaver wrote:Finally we have agreed to disagree.

I'm done. I like the new codex enough to build an army around it (although I'm gonna start Tau so who knows if I'll get one done before the next Chaos codex).

Adios.

No hard feelings guys. Sometimes it's fun to exercise a little brain power in a debate, even against people who sometimes act like fethwits.

Not be horribly snarky, but you seem to have simply agreed to not read or process my arguments. Even here, your statement centers around how you feel, and not anything larger.

keezus wrote:To sum up:

V3.5 Eldar: Sandwiches, Wraps and Burritos with Different fillings.

V4 Eldar: Sandwiches, Wraps and Burritos with x1/2 fillings. (in the way that Swordwind can only be built in an inefficient roundabout way and craftworld archetypes lost all their special rules)

V3.5 Chaos: Sandwiches, Wraps and Burritos with different fillings.

V4 Chaos: Burritos. All the fillings previously available are still mostly available... you can only put them in burritos though, whether it makes sense or not. (in the way that daemonbomb, infiltrators, cultists, firebase and super character chaos lists are not options in the new codex AND the cult armies lost all their special rules)

That's a really good way to put it. To be pedantic I'd point out that the Eldar also gained Quesadellias (autarchs and harlies). and you could now buy any entree with any side dish (eliminating the restrictions of CWE).