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.

Mate, I am here in Aus, and this is the first time I have ever sent a message to DAKKA DAKKA. I joined this site because a friend forwarded me you synopsis of the Codex:Chaos. I hope you write proffessionally for a living. Funny and incisive. Any fool out there like "Ozzy" needs his head read. You obviously went to a lot of effort to give me and many others a chuckle at GW's expense. Well done H.B.M.C.

And as an aside, when you look at the $1000's of dollars of minatures on the table, the $100's you spend on Codexes that seem to be updated every year or so(Overly SM Biased), you wonder, do the owners of GW have a medical condition? Heads up A$$ Syndrome?

Keep up the commentary mate, I hope someone at GW hears about it...(probably not though.see medical condition)

well, I dont know if this will cheer you up at all, but phil kelly is doing orks.

Youre prolly not going to get klans, but its not like we have had them in the past anyways. cant miss something you never had.

So if you liked the eldar codex (which I do for the most part) then this could be seen as good news.

No Gav or Jervis touching it like a pedophile, ruining its innocence. That, atleast to me, is worth something.

Jervis is in charge of 40k, so all codexes (or codices if you prefer) will be in this same, crappy format. Doesn't matter who's writing it.

There will be next to no "Kustomization" in the Ork list.

One of the guys in our group will be looking forward to the new ORK Codex. He has about 10,000 points worth. At the moment, I have about 1,500 points worth of SM that beats it easily..........HAHAHAHAH

Except.....there;s nothing that shows that will happen.

DA still have flaws, as do the eldar and other books. Just less innumbers. They arent improving their rules WRITING and EDITING, just less options.

HBMC is right, this isnt a chaos codex. Its renegade marine one.

Yak is right, as their simplifying the rules for, theoretically, better game.

But this isnt the chaos codex as far as I see, its a renegade one. It doesnt play to the first founding Chapters from the horus heresy, which IS THE BLOODY CENTRAL PIVOTAL POINT IN THE GW UNIVERSE, then its not chaos codex.

Rengades are cool....but come on, we've all read the stories and books on the HH....the fall and corruption of the first founders is ver nice.

And all of you that just poo pooing many peoples hard work and converstions and telling them to suck it up...*bleeping* shame on you. No one's hard work should be trashed in that kind of manner as whats been done.

Almost all the first founding and LatD lists are hosed. Alot of work ruined. And the fact that folks are fine with it speaks volumes about you. And nothing good.

Just goes to show you have no brains nor clue.

PP has a good track record with the rules. They keep them tight. They keep on TOP of them, so when something isnt right, you can ask and get an answer. They keep a living FAQ going so things are taken care of.

Right now....the only thing GW has done is dumb down the rules. When I see more effort, they the *female dog*ing will stop. But GW's PAST track record has been piss poor. I see no reason to believe them when they've lied and not followed through in the past.

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......

Ozzy may be the spokes-person for my Charity for the Terminally Stupid, but you Toraeador, without a doubt, are our mascot.

1a. Most people with a little bit of intelligence are capable of viewing the Codex and working out what's good and what's not from reading it. Most of us have reading comprehension skills. Knowing if a unit sucks, is over priced or over powered doesn't require you to always play a game with it.
1b. I'm fairly certain that a lot of powerful (and abused) lists will come from this list, but my argument centres not on whether or not the Codex is powerful. I don't care how powerful it is if it's boring and not fun to play with/against.

2. I consider the Tyranid Codex a complete failure. And this has nothing to do with 'Zilla Nids being so powerful - I don't care if they're powerful. It has more to do with the fact that the Tyranids are not represented well with the Codex. Certain options are always taken, hence the reason for 'Zilla 'Nids, and what we're left with is an army with lots of big monsters, and a few throwaway units/troubleshooters. There's no more Tyranid Swarm, with lots of little gribblys and a few big Leader Monsters - there's just 2 Tyrants, 6 'Fexes and a few things added for flavour. 'Zilla 'Nids is contrary to the Tyranid fluff, even if it is an incredibly powerful army.

As someone who's been playing Tyranids since they were first invented, I find that very saddening.

BYE

Stealer lists are pretty decent.

But yeah, tyranid codex was a bust.....its forever being portrayed as a horde of creatures screaming across the table....

Whats played is a bunch of TMC's for the most part. Or most popular.

Even as a Renegade codex it fails.

And these "Renegades" all apparently trade in their Assault Cannons, Storm Bolters, ect. for post-heresey weaponry and stuff. I guess those Traitor Legions love to share, bless 'em.

Yeah I guess if there would be Renegades turned not too long after the Hersey and would have the same stuff, but come on. Most of the focus has been on traitor legions and pre-heresy, even down to the look of the models equipment and stuff. Trying to suddenly make them into Renegades is making them into something they aren't.

The poster child of the codex, Huron and his mob would definitely have newer equipment. Indeed, the original Huron/Corsair rules allowed you to take units from the Marine codex.

I have played both CSM's and Dirty Nids( I play Vanilla SM's). Depending on the mission, points and opponent, any Codex has the potential to be used and abused. For ex., HBMC's stance on the 3 Vindi's...... If you played against me with that, I would probably cry"Unfair!" even though it is not. I think with 40k, the rules give you good guidelines, but basically, if you have a W@#ker of an opponent, it does not matter how good the Codex is, the game will SUK.

Posted By H.B.M.C. on 08/15/2007 6:20 PM

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......

Ozzy may be the spokes-person for my Charity for the Terminally Stupid, but you Toraeador, without a doubt, are our mascot.

1a. Most people with a little bit of intelligence are capable of viewing the Codex and working out what's good and what's not from reading it. Most of us have reading comprehension skills. Knowing if a unit sucks, is over priced or over powered doesn't require you to always play a game with it.
1b. I'm fairly certain that a lot of powerful (and abused) lists will come from this list, but my argument centres not on whether or not the Codex is powerful. I don't care how powerful it is if it's boring and not fun to play with/against.

2. I consider the Tyranid Codex a complete failure. And this has nothing to do with 'Zilla Nids being so powerful - I don't care if they're powerful. It has more to do with the fact that the Tyranids are not represented well with the Codex. Certain options are always taken, hence the reason for 'Zilla 'Nids, and what we're left with is an army with lots of big monsters, and a few throwaway units/troubleshooters. There's no more Tyranid Swarm, with lots of little gribblys and a few big Leader Monsters - there's just 2 Tyrants, 6 'Fexes and a few things added for flavour. 'Zilla 'Nids is contrary to the Tyranid fluff, even if it is an incredibly powerful army.

As someone who's been playing Tyranids since they were first invented, I find that very saddening.

BYE

Its the player not the codex. One of the best tyranid players I know runs 2 squads of hormaguants and two squads of termegaunts without number and warriors for the rest of the army. He wins quite a few games and we always have fun playing. He also runs a chaos army of his own design and does very well with it. He doesn't think any of his units will change in the new codex. A really good player can take even the most seeming useless of choices  and turn them into a good army by finding out how they work to compliment each other. Choosing to use things that other people do not use dose not make you terminally stupid it makes you able to think for yourself. I understand your argument perfectly however I disagree that the codex makes it boring it is usually the player who does that. I understand that you will now feel the need to insult me as well and if that makes you feel better than go ahead.

I would like to say that I do applaud you and your play group in making your own version of the rules that better suits the way you want to play the game my group also has certain house rules we use. For the last 30 years GW has said that you should mutually agree on things that make your games more fun, the only time things get sticky is when you introduce a new element to the community. (i.e tournaments)  When this happens it is important that either you stick to the published rules or let all of the players know what to expect.(like the people at Adepticon with thier FAQ section)

He's right you know.

I know this guy who plays orks, and sometimes...he wins. (shocking I know)

Posted By carmachu on 08/15/2007 6:05 PM
DA still have flaws, as do the eldar and other books. Just less innumbers. They arent improving their rules WRITING and EDITING, just less options.

Well, their solution to the inclusion of bad options is to have less options.  Afterall an option can't be bad if it doesn't exist, right?  Taking this process to its logical conclusion, the solution to bad rules writing is, of course, to not write any more rules.  Yay!

Posted By vhwolf on 08/15/2007 6:52 PM

its the player not the codex.

It's the writers.

They are both incapable and unwilling to make their armies fit their fluff and be powerful at the same time. I've always, always said that fluff should be congruent with power. The more fluffy your army gets, the more powerful your army should get.

This is why I hated people whining endlessly about Iron Warriors. Name me one other army that was that powerful when it stuck to its fluff? Good luck with that.

On the other hand, you get armies like 3rd Ed Blood Angels, there were extremely powerful with the Death Company and their super-charged Rhinos in 3rd Ed - yet the BA's are actually a Codex Chapter, something that's yet to be shown in their rules. Only the 2nd Ed Codex Angels of Death got close to that.

BYE

Posted By H.B.M.C. on 08/15/2007 6:20 PM

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......

Ozzy may be the spokes-person for my Charity for the Terminally Stupid, but you Toraeador, without a doubt, are our mascot.

1a. Most people with a little bit of intelligence are capable of viewing the Codex and working out what's good and what's not from reading it. Most of us have reading comprehension skills. Knowing if a unit sucks, is over priced or over powered doesn't require you to always play a game with it.
1b. I'm fairly certain that a lot of powerful (and abused) lists will come from this list, but my argument centres not on whether or not the Codex is powerful. I don't care how powerful it is if it's boring and not fun to play with/against.

2. I consider the Tyranid Codex a complete failure. And this has nothing to do with 'Zilla Nids being so powerful - I don't care if they're powerful. It has more to do with the fact that the Tyranids are not represented well with the Codex. Certain options are always taken, hence the reason for 'Zilla 'Nids, and what we're left with is an army with lots of big monsters, and a few throwaway units/troubleshooters. There's no more Tyranid Swarm, with lots of little gribblys and a few big Leader Monsters - there's just 2 Tyrants, 6 'Fexes and a few things added for flavour. 'Zilla 'Nids is contrary to the Tyranid fluff, even if it is an incredibly powerful army.

As someone who's been playing Tyranids since they were first invented, I find that very saddening.

BYE

Hi.. first time posting....  Now.. I have been playing Tyranids since they were first released and I have no Prob with the current dex.

  If you loved Tyranids so much then i guess you loved it back then when an IG army  or a Space Marine army would make rad grenade line infront of them which pretty much guarenteed that your Nid army just lost the game in the first round...

  First off Zilla Nid Lists aren't against fluff as the tyranids are KNOWN to use thier Canifexes as battering rams against fortified areas that the gaunts can't penatrate.  The Carnifex is the tank of the Tyranids and it is used as such. Second 40k is so small scale for a Tyranid Army since Tyranids strike in the MILLIONS.  Thats like looking at an IG army list and thinking thats a whole of a regiment... when it isn't. 

  The Tyranids attack in a giant swarm  but that does not mean that at every battlefield you will see only 1 or two carnifexes.  Thats like saying Tank Columns don't exist when if anything the Armoured company list should be in the IG codex.

  Any way.  I read the rant and i think its a little misdirected.  One just because the Chaos marines are not Codex does not mean they do not use unit organizations.    Infact,   the arguement can be made that they still use the Legion formations they did before,  during,  and after the heresey. 

  Just because a military force goes rogue does not mean it remakes its unit organizations if those formations still work.  Chaos Space Marines may be vicious ruthless monsters but they are still brilliant tacticions and strategists.  Infact,  the Legion specific marines are known to keep the same fighting doctrines and formations they did during and after the Heresey.

  Why make new organizations and new formations? 

  Anyway,  the 3.5 codex was broken and losing that garbage means nothing.  As for the legion Specific rules...   What do they need to do with  the forces of Undivided marines?  I mean really IG players have been playing for the longest time with the fact that just load out and weapons makes a Cadian force,  a Steel Legion Force,  or a Vostroyan force.  I would think what defines the Legions is how they fight on the battlefield not the special rule that says "This force does this.".

  Its like Marines you have 4 big Divergent chapters and the rest are all codex. You can make your name your Codex and paint them however you like and you can choose the way they fight.

  If anything is the problem its the way the four cult marines are treated.  The new codex would have been nice had it be an Undived Codex.   The Icon system is nice until the cult marines are made an option...  Then one must ask why use the Icon system when you could use Cult Marines.   Making 4 cult Marine Codexes has been long over due.

  Also just because a Defiler is WS3 doesn't make it bad...  How many Str10 attacks does it get?

  If you are honestly complaining about the 4th ed codex then i don't know what crack you are sniffing because 3rd Ed dumbed down 40k so much that if you think 3.5 Chaos was fluffy then you are SADLY mistaken.

 

Ah yea, H.B.M.C, the ol theory hammer defense. For calling other people terminally stupid, maybe you can be the back half of the mascot. I am in agreement with you about certain things though. There are options that no matter what are not worth taking, and even using them in a game is futile. There are also other things that are found to be good. A lot of knee jerk reactions are just that. Repentia, and almost all Dreads fit the bill. They are priced much higher than the other items that compete for the slots, and aren't even near as good. I just can't see a reason to field a dread in the new BA and DA dex, along with the new C:SM dex, there is no point to it

I have also been playing tyranids since the early days, and have watched the figures get better and better over time, but the rules not represent the fluff. The lack of balance helps proliferate the Zilla nids though. When it is assumed that every other combination is crap, people stick with what they can win with. There are a few nid army types that are competitive, but few actually represent the fluff.

Posted By H.B.M.C. on 08/15/2007 8:22 PM

Posted By vhwolf on 08/15/2007 6:52 PM

its the player not the codex.

It's the writers.

They are both incapable and unwilling to make their armies fit their fluff and be powerful at the same time. I've always, always said that fluff should be congruent with power. The more fluffy your army gets, the more powerful your army should get.

This is why I hated people whining endlessly about Iron Warriors. Name me one other army that was that powerful when it stuck to its fluff? Good luck with that.

On the other hand, you get armies like 3rd Ed Blood Angels, there were extremely powerful with the Death Company and their super-charged Rhinos in 3rd Ed - yet the BA's are actually a Codex Chapter, something that's yet to be shown in their rules. Only the 2nd Ed Codex Angels of Death got close to that.

BYE

   The IW was a broken army and it didn't reflect the Iron warriors.    The Iron Warrior Doctrine is they pounded thier with all thier avialable firepower while moving with thier opponent and ready to repel the enemy counter attack.


  That does not translate into 4 heavy support and 3 squads of Oblits. 


  Your right the Devs don't follow the fluff if they did we wouldn't see the new 2 Daemon Prince Armies that we will see.  Or the Rainbow Alliance of Khorne and Slaneesh holding hands and fighting along side eachother while being led by a Tzeentch lord....


  But my feeling is thats not what you really care about but more so the power of the old codex is not as blantant as the new.

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

carmachu: "Except.....there;s nothing that shows that will happen."

carmachu (after becoming fully conscious) "Yak is right, as their simplifying the rules for, theoretically, better game."

carmachu: (to me)"Just goes to show you have no brains nor clue."

Since I have neither brains nor clue someone will have to explain to me how Yak can be right about them simplifying the rules for a better game while they simultaneously show us that that won't happen. Unless you're definition of "better game" is something other than "solid rules."

While we wait for that we'll continue.

To the rest: I bid you lick me if you've ever uttered a phrase similar to the following, "Well, you're fooling yourself if you don't go with a 6 man las-plas tac squad with a vet sarge armed with a p-fist!" If that is you then it's time to stop complaining about fewer options. Stop complaining right now.

If you have ever fielded a grey plastic pair of legs and claimed that it was a marine carrying a plasma gun then stop complaining about armies losing their identity. Stop complaining right now.

If you have ever complained about the fact that when a new codex comes out it becomes the new power house army to play then stop complaining. Stop complaining right now.

The thing is I AGREE with HBMC about this being an unfluffy codex. I think he's absolutely right. I also agree that an army should be rewarded for adhering to the fluff closely. By adding an extra heavy slot to the Iron Warriors GW did that. Did they have to add 'magic demon eyes' as a wargear list entry to do it? No. They didn't give us any DIFFERENT options. They just said we could take one more. Perfect! Don't confuse us with Searchlights and Camo Netting or any other idiotic stuff no one would touch with a ten foot pole anyways. Here's the sad fact though. By rewarding armies for going with the flow and sticking to the fluff we are essentially punishing armies that do NOT go with the flow. This, of course, results in even less diversity as there becomes only one viable way to play the given armies. If players want to lose there are easier ways to do it than to build non-competitive armies and compete. I know if I was planning on losing consistently I would just challenge carmachu to an awesome post contest! Oh man! Lemme tell ya! I surrender! You win buddy.

Posted By Heritor on 08/15/2007 8:52 PM

But my feeling is thats not what you really care about but more so the power of the old codex is not as blantant as the new.

That was almost a full sentence, but let's say for a second I know what you're talking about, that would translate to:

I think all you really want is more power.

And y'know what? You'd be right.

I want lots of power. I want all my lists to be powerful. I want everything to be powerful.

Read that again:

I want everything to be powerful. That's every army, every list, every unit. I'm not just out for myself. I'm not angry because my pet unit got depowered. I'll be annoyed if anything gets depowered. Every list should be powerful, and every powerful list should be fluffy. Then the game can be about two people playing against each other, rather than two people tweaking a list into oblivion.

BYE

The problem is one of choice.  The new Chaos Codex permits you little to no choice.  That is the problem; it is not the solution.

 

That is also all about perception, some people play with lists with few options in this, and a lot of other games, and come out with a lot of different lists. It's the perception at what options you have. I quite understand that it is upsetting to lose these options with a new dex, but in one corner is the group that would rather have a playable game that we don't have to make rules for (makes it very hard to just have pick up games when you start hour ruling things), and the others that are all about the very minuscule tweaking of lists. As always there will be very different camps.

But H.B.M.C doesn't even play normal 40k anymore, and will just use what he wants anyway. He comes at all of this from the angle of hating the game as it stands and making better rules. So listening to him babble is like listening to a Linux user talking to people that use Microsoft about their product.

I like what he is doing (though would never play it, been there, done that) and do agree with a lot of his opinions. There is just a big difference between dissent, and being a raving loony.

Posted By Razor Gator on 08/15/2007 6:30 PM
And these "Renegades" all apparently trade in their Assault Cannons, Storm Bolters, ect. for post-heresey weaponry and stuff.

That's because CSM are the goth kids of 40K.  Go ahead and use your assault cannons like all the other conformists!

Combi-bolters are the new Invader Zim t-shirts.

Posted By vhwolf on 08/15/2007 9:13 PM

The problem is one of choice.  The new Chaos Codex permits you little to no choice.  That is the problem; it is not the solution.

 

I can accept that other people don't feel this way, but really, what is the point of the whole list creation process if you will always end up (more or less) at the same few, tried and true ends (if you are facing someone else who is doing the same thing?).  Sure; you can choose to deliberately play with a substandard list; doesn't change the fact that it is substandard....

Posted By vhwolf on 08/15/2007 9:13 PM

The problem is one of choice.  The new Chaos Codex permits you little to no choice.  That is the problem; it is not the solution.

 

I can accept that other people don't feel this way, but really, what is the point of the whole list creation process if you will always end up (more or less) at the same few, tried and true ends (if you are facing someone else who is doing the same thing?).  Sure; you can choose to deliberately play with a substandard list; doesn't change the fact that it is substandard....

Posted By Toreador on 08/15/2007 8:34 PM
Ah yea, H.B.M.C, the ol theory hammer defense

Ah Toreador, the old "I'm not educated enough to understand basic statistics, so I'll pretend that they don't matter" defense.  It gets really tiring when people who lack intelligence and education think that their ignorant opinions have value.

Guys this is a fun thread, let's not get it closed due to ad hominym (sp?) attacks.

You're just saying that because you're a dirty commie spy!!!

How many times do people read half a review and then comment on the whole thing? Some of them have probably read half of LOTR and then say it sucks how Sauron won. HBMC, if you have any other Codex reviews, I would like to read them, can you please tell me where to find them?