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.

They have a use. Its incredibly specialized and they are not easy to use, but they have a use.

Its not that hard. Its only what, 5 slots of warriors, 2 HQ and 3 elite.

The rumors I have seen regarding the new rules for BA sound pretty good to me. Sure they are just rumors but if they comes to pass then it looks to me like is GW practicing their typical flip flop policy.

Let's look at who wrote the 4th edition codices out now:

SM - Graham McNeill and Pete Haines (both ardent SM players and both no longer with GW)
Tyranids - Phil Kelly
Black Templars - Graham McNeill
Eldar - Phil Kelly
Tau - ?
Dark Angels - Jervis Johnson & Andy Hoare

From what I read Andy wrote the fluff including the nice section on the DA successor chapters while Jervis focused on the rules. Andy has some written some very nice codices such as the two for Ordos armies but I personally do not consider him a SM player. Phil plays both eldar (his favorite) and Tyranids. Both eldar and Tyranids got good codices for 4th edition in my opinion, with eldar on top and Tyranids very viable as the Big Bugz list. I don't know who wrote the Tau codex but it is also quite good. Maybe the Black Templars is the last of the old school SM armies with hard as nail HQ and lots of neat wargear. I heard GW considered the BT codex a failure and that is why Graham is no longer with the company. Actually BT can be a very good drop pod army though I think the players loyal to this old EZ army were miffed about the problem with their Emperor's Champion not being able to join other units prior to deployment.

The new layout taken from the Fantasy books does nothing for me. It is just a copy of that particular layout... nothing new whatsoever. To me it looks like there is no longer a champion left in the development team for Imperial Space Marines but Phil always does right by his own personal choice of armies. Jervis muddled three codices (DE, DA, & Chaos) back in third edition, all which had to be rewritten. The rules for DA are very specific for one chapter while eldar had to cover many various craftworlds and such. So to be honest I do not really see any new direction at all.

- Greenie

Posted By Green Bloater on 04/15/2007 2:36 PM
I heard GW considered the BT codex a failure and that is why Graham is no longer with the company.

So BT didn't do as well as they had hoped because Graham didn't make the new BT codex as super-stupid-broken-powerful as their old rules - and he got canned as a result?  If that is indeed true then GW is officially run by retards.

Posted By Abadabadoobaddon on 04/17/2007 9:08 AM

Posted By Green Bloater on 04/15/2007 2:36 PM
I heard GW considered the BT codex a failure and that is why Graham is no longer with the company.

So BT didn't do as well as they had hoped because Graham didn't make the new BT codex as super-stupid-broken-powerful as their old rules - and he got canned as a result?  If that is indeed true then GW is officially run by retards.

Sounds about right.

Meanwhile, they specifically instruct other writers to make their codexes suck (rules-wise)...

If you don't know where the pendulum is at any given moment, it's likely to smack you in the back of the head.

Quoted for truth.

Capt K

I, for one, am happy with the new direction.

Keep in mind, many of us play just to get our minds off work and have some fun. I was at a local game store and saw some guys playing 40k. Made me nostalgic, thought of digging out my Orks, finish painting them up and bringing them down for a game or two.

Mostly, everyone argued. Over rules, over optional equipment, whether or not they could take them or if they were even represented accurately on their models. Then, they compared Army Lists. Some didn't even play because "there was no way for my army to win against this". Others played, but the armies were so tricked out it was stupid.

So, I want balance. I don't enjoy spending hundreds of dollars just to compare sheets and feel like I've got to quit because someone's playing to the letter--not the spirit--of the game (and rules).

Thank God Jervis is here. Seriously. Because you can say anything you wish of the man, but he's always been more about the fun and the spirit of the game than anything else. And he's supported those who've bought GW's products.

Say what you will, but there's a reason games like Warmachine is doing HUGE BUSINESS. And they don't let you specially equip anyone, either. It's because the game should be played on the table, with tactics and fun, not on paper and screen with theoryhammer 40k in mind.

Just one man's opinion.

I don't see why letting people choose equip will cause less balance or more rules disputes. - If GW writes the books well (and for the price they should be) then there shouldn't be any conflicts like that.

The fact that Jervis writes incomplete, vague and ambiguous rules makes the problems you described worse, not better.

Posted By Asmodai on 04/17/2007 10:53 AM
I don't see why letting people choose equip will cause less balance or more rules disputes. - If GW writes the books well (and for the price they should be) then there shouldn't be any conflicts like that.

The fact that Jervis writes incomplete, vague and ambiguous rules makes the problems you described worse, not better.

I assume you are mentioning the "assault out of drop pods" or "can't assault cause your model is carrying a bolter" type 'problems' that really don't exist outside of the confines of Dakka.

There are waaaay bigger problems than that and often, they do stem from armory and equipment.  I don't know how many illegal Chaos lords I've seen (and the arguments over whether or not they actually are illegal) simply due to how incredibly complex the Chaos codex wargear section is.  If you've actually read the DA codex, you'll see how remarkably simple it is to not only create a character, but also to make an army (everything is divisible by 5).  Yes, DA aren't as powerful, but pretty much only in relation to the current Chaos codex and Space Marine codex, both of which are up for a re-write.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

"There are waaaay bigger problems than that and often, they do stem from armory and equipment."

Sure there are, but there shouldn't be.

Tossing in the towel by saying "We can't write decent rules for armory and equipment, so we're not going to try" seems like an inadequate solution. If GW's current writers aren't up to this task (and it isn't rocket science), then GW should find writers who are.

There's no reason why wargear and daemonic power selection can't be written up in a clear and unambiguous way that still preserves flexibility and balance. Ditto for doctrines, traits and sublists.

I see no reason to applaud GW for setting their sights lower.

I'm  of mixed feelings about the direction 40k is taking.  I hope the new Chaos codex doesn't end up being a total throwback to the previous one and eliminate the flavor of the various powers. The generic demons and marines from that dex caused me to put my Chaos away on the shelf and not make another miniatures purchase for my budding Chaos army until the current codex came out. The thing that will bug us in my group is that we all run power specific armies for each of the Gods and it would be a real pisser to have a bunch of minis suddenly go the way of Squats.  I guess our option would be to ignore the new dex coming out if it is a wash and continue using the current codex within our group. 

  On the other hand, I remember slogging through the old RT rules where every army could have anything and everything.  I was in one game where I was facing an army of Genestealers that had squads of cultists in Terminator armor with other squads wielding shurikan catapults..  I was happy with the more focused approach of the later editions.  I have to admit I do like the new DA codex and am working on an army from it.

Then again, the new Chaos codex might be a good surprise and all the worry will have been for nothing.

Posted By WarsmithMorgoth on 04/03/2007 9:43 AM
I just hope that the iron warriors are represented somehow

Have you heard of what happened to Biel-Tan Eldar? How about all of those Ulthwe Strike Force owners? I hope they drop Iron Warriors, and I predict that they will. They are the only list left that allows you to break the Force Org chart, and they are arguably one of the most broken armies ever published by GW. I predict that they get the same treatment that specialist Eldar armies got...i.e. NERF!

Posted By Lowinor on 04/03/2007 5:22 PM

Plastic Chaos termies makes me think they'll get a nice upgrade somehow -- AP3 Reapers, anyone?

If they had made all Autocannons in the game AP3 and kept it that way since the 3rd edition overhaul, power armor armies wouldn't be nearly as prevalent or powerful as they currently are...

@ Asmodai--
What codex was specifically directed by the GW management to "suck?" If you follow the progression of codexi through 3rd edition, there was a clear codex creep regarding power level. This trend was finally and hopefully permanently put to rest with the release of the new Eldar codex, and reinforced by the DA release. Perhaps it is this previous codex creep that you are noticing that made you say that?

In general, I don't understand why people are so eager to call out the DA codex as crappy or underpowered. There is no evidence that it is either, and it has a couple of tricks up its sleeve that most other armies can't pull off...yet. The ONLY unit that I might call "underpowered" for the cost, depending on your army list, in the new DA codex is Terminators.

With any change comes tradeoffs. Granted, a small amount of variety was removed from the various armies that you can field with the new codexes. The largest loss of variability was with the different army lists--and most variant army lists are/were broken. So while I agree that diversity has been lessened, I believe that in almost every circumstance it is for the better.

Personally I think that the "modular" list concept is a good one. You can still make up to three very distinct lists with the DA and Eldar codeci. If anything DA got an increase in their diversity within their own codex.

The real, true reason everyone is pissed off about these most recent releases is that, in general, they are definitely underpowered compared to the tier-1 lists. This is more a problem with these lists still being viable and legal while other, previously viable tier-1 lists are not. So really people are upset about GW's inability to completely rework the game in one go, as it should have been as in 3rd edition. Give it time and hopefully GW will stay consistent with this most recent round of releases and bring all of the codexi "in line" with each other power-wise.

Posted By Asmodai on 04/17/2007 9:29 AM

Posted By Abadabadoobaddon on 04/17/2007 9:08 AM

Posted By Green Bloater on 04/15/2007 2:36 PM
I heard GW considered the BT codex a failure and that is why Graham is no longer with the company.

So BT didn't do as well as they had hoped because Graham didn't make the new BT codex as super-stupid-broken-powerful as their old rules - and he got canned as a result?  If that is indeed true then GW is officially run by retards.

Sounds about right.

Meanwhile, they specifically instruct other writers to make their codexes suck (rules-wise)...

Maybe they want to can their other writers too?  In fact, I predict that when Dark Eldar finally get redone Jervis will release a codex so sucky Tom Kirby will fire everyone in the company (including himself)!

Posted By Ozymandias on 04/17/2007 12:08 PM

Posted By Asmodai on 04/17/2007 10:53 AM
I don't see why letting people choose equip will cause less balance or more rules disputes. - If GW writes the books well (and for the price they should be) then there shouldn't be any conflicts like that.

The fact that Jervis writes incomplete, vague and ambiguous rules makes the problems you described worse, not better.

I assume you are mentioning the "assault out of drop pods" or "can't assault cause your model is carrying a bolter" type 'problems' that really don't exist outside of the confines of Dakka.

Bollocks!

Both of those discussions were originated on Bolter and chainsword and Warseer respectivley.

But I agree with manitouejoe.

Less hassles pregame is always better.

Posted By Ozymandias on 04/17/2007 12:08 PM
Yes, DA aren't as powerful, but pretty much only in relation to the current Chaos codex and Space Marine codex, both of which are up for a re-write.

Too bad tyranids and Tau arent also up for a rewrite as they make a mockery of DA just as much as chaos or SM. (i.e all other 4th ed codexs prior to DA)

Sir, I take offense at your comment. It is clearly the fact my army wears dresses that makes them a mockery, not some deviant alien scum.

In all seriousness, you've got to admit the only reason people play Nidzilla armies is because they CAN'T Mechanize their lists. Otherwise, they'd Mechanize, too. Just to keep up with C:SM and CSM (which is so confusing to read).

Hellfury is right about pre-game. And besides, there's NO model/unit optimization in Warmachine and people seem to like it just fine. This new move is just cleaner and easier to manage. And any game designer will tell you, the greater the number of options and variables in a game, the more likely the system will crack or break.

Posted By Hellfury on 04/18/2007 6:02 AM
Too bad tyranids and Tau arent also up for a rewrite as they make a mockery of DA just as much as chaos or SM. (i.e all other 4th ed codexs prior to DA)

Thank You...  for a minute there I thought I was reading BnC or warseer.  

The whole "OMG the DA codex is the suxxors!" is getting really old. I will 100% completely agree they are not up to the standard of min/max SM, IW, Nidzillas, or any of the other broken lists, but to just jump on the DA sucks bandwagon without playing a game with it or (as some of you seem) without even reading the codex itself is getting quite stale.

Get over it, and get used to it cause C:CSM and C:SM redux are going to follow suit.

@ Hellfury: When I said Dakka, I was referring to internet forums in general. It really is only online that every line in a rulebook or codex is put under a magnifying glass and super analyzed.  And DA can beat Tau just fine, didn't you read the battle report, they wiped them out to a man!

@Asmodai: An armoury is a set of options that the character can pick from. DA has this, they have it with every single character entry. Chaos could do something similar, Character can trade bolt pistol from x, character can trade chainsword for x, character can select 100 points from the following list of options... etc. It would work just fine and would be a whole lot clearer.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

OMG, DARK ANGELS are the SUXXORSS!!!! Get over yourself Ozzy! They suck. I've loved them, their fluff, and played them since late 2nd, but guess what? They got boned again. Although they still aren't as bad as Thousand Sons, I'm beginning to wonder who I pissed off to constantly have my army getting nerfed.

I picked DA cause I liked the fact that they were 4 armies in 1. I could play all Deathwing, all Ravenwing, all regular, or mixed. That has been taken from me and it pisses me off! I don't like that they don't compete with regular marines. And yes, I understand that you think that regular marines will soon suck too. Guess what, that doesn't make me any happier.

There are multiple things that could have been done to achieve a good balance without totally screwing paying customers the way GW has done and continues to plan on doing. I am sick of losing options that I have modelled. I liked my las/plas razorbacks long before I saw them anywhere else. I liked my autocannon scout. I liked kitting my HQ characters out with different combos and worked hard on them and spent lots of money on them before getting smart and going with rare earth magnets so I didn't have to continue paying tons of money for models that would no longer be viable.

And this is positively minor compared to what I expect to have happen with chaos. Think of all the Lost and Damned armies that I bet will get screwed. What about 1K sons with powerfists? GW needs to pull its head out of its nether regions and start listening to some of the legitimate gripes from its customers and fixing things. And guess what, Jervis' plan is not what I'm talking about. He's not listening to a majority and then forming a unbiased well thought out opinion. Instead, he's trolling to find a minority that agrees with his limited view and then going forth feeling vindicated based on the sample he found to support himself. And fanboys like you that refuse to look at the bigger picture and continue to praise any scraps that you get thrown from the GW table don't help! Quit being a sheep and take a long hard unbiased look at the direction GW is heading. After you've done that and convinced yourself to overlook what a mess it is, I would personally appreciate it if you could find it within yourself to go post with the other fanboys at Warseer. I don't really see this happening as I'm not generally that lucky, but hope springs eternal.

Aw shucks Rygoth.  Ultimately an army with 2 combat squads each has got plenty going for it.

Posted By ColonelEllios on 04/17/2007 12:57 PM

I hope they drop Iron Warriors... and they are arguably one of the most broken armies ever published by GW. I predict that they get the same treatment that specialist Eldar armies got...i.e. NERF!

And yet oddly the Iron Warriors were also one of the few armies in 40K where playing to their fluff made them very powerful. It's a shame that playing an army as described in the fluff would make them broken...

And the specialist Eldar armies did not get nerfed. They got removed.

BYE

Posted By Rygoth on 04/18/2007 8:16 PM
Think of all the Lost and Damned armies that I bet will get screwed.

Me and my 90 carefully constructed and painstakingly converted mutants simply cannot wait for that day.

BYE

I think there is one real logical explanation going behind this 'DA' trend, it can be explained by saying that the monkeys that make up the rules think by their wallet and not their nether regions/head, ie. In my opionon they want you to buy more stuff so you can use your army again! And all that talk of slumping sales Iv been hearing supports my theory. thats my 2 cents on the argument

Or, they could have realized just how bad the Marine dex could be abused, and didn't want to replicate that in another varient of that codex that's also somewhat slated to being shooty and had issues with the amount of over powered options could be cramed into the respective varient lists in that dex (Raven Wing, Death Wing).

Seriously, if all Marines were like the DA people wouldn't really *female dog* about them. They'd *female dog* about Chaos, Eldar, and Nids, and somewhat Tau.

When the Chaos dex comes out, we'll see if the whole toning down trend is going to be enforced after the DA. As far as I'm concerned the Eldar are still a broken dex, just they were so much more broken before that it seems like a huge nerf.

Posted By Thesamdude on 04/19/2007 3:31 AM
I think there is one real logical explanation going behind this 'DA' trend, it can be explained by saying that the monkeys that make up the rules think by their wallet and not their nether regions/head, ie. In my opionon they want you to buy more stuff so you can use your army again! And all that talk of slumping sales Iv been hearing supports my theory. thats my 2 cents on the argument

I think if this were true GW would produce a new/powerful codex with new/powerful unit types to sell new models...  so the monkey satement is, at least true...

Im sorry ColonelEllios but i have to respond to you wishing that IW get pulled from the dex.  I have played them since the WD Index Astartes article came out.
I think they they are great both rules-wise and fluff-wise, the only problem with the current rules for them is the amount of obliterators they can take and the only problem with that is that GW MADE obliterators so powerful. 
Anyone remember the OLD obliterator rules??
Tone down obliterators, or put a better limit on them and the IW list is perfectly acceptable on the battlefield. So no i disagree that they are "one of the most broken armies on the battlefield".

And another thing about the IW, that fact that they get to "break" force organization is not that unbalancing, think about all the units IW cant field, daemons for one, all the cult troops, and the special psychic powers for the different gods.  Also by being limited to one fast attack choice (if you so choose) means that they are definately not going to run across the battlefield and assualt, so they are forced to shoot, which is one reason why they are so cool (and could be considered a drawback).

Oh and the question about wargear in the chaos dex is a simple one to solve,  simply re-label the section making it clear what items count towards what points limit when creating a lord ie. what items dont count toward the 150pt limit what items count toward the 100pt limit for daemon abilities, etc.

It is simply a re-organization that is needed NOT a toning down to make it easier to use.

Another thing the new dex's are doing is the special character thing, you know without one you cant field the army etc, if they do that to chaos then GW is making a huge misstep.  Why would i field black legion if i had to take Abadon for example, a 250pt character just to play my army of choice? what? And why in the world would Abadon be there? It makes no sense fluff-wise that he would be at every black legion battle.  MAKING people play special characters is just plain WRONG.

If the IW are nixed, if they require special characters, if they tone down the wargear to IG or DA levels, if they get rid of LATD then im sorry, but GW will have made a mistake and they will be taking the game to the wrong place. 

my 2 cents

PS - I play WARHAMMER 40K not some prepainted-all-the-units-are-done-for-me clix game thingy.
<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td class="Normal"></td> <td>
</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

Could we create a forum entitled Love of 3rd Edition for people that cannot make the transition to 4th edition? It would certainly stop all the spill over into the other forums that are nothing more than lamenting about how great 3rd edition was.

- Greenie

I guess my last post didnt get to my point.  The title of the thread is "Is 40k about to get balanced?"  My response to that question is based on my experience playing IW throughout 3rd and 4th edition.  Sure my codex was around in 3rd edition and 4th came out before a codex revision came out for my army, but i have to say that i am not a 3rd edition lover the chaos codex made a good transition where maybe other ones didn't. 

This leads to my answer to the question posed by the title of this thread, if by balanced you mean gutting codices, cutting out options and eliminating specific armies, then yes its getting balanced (if DA is any indication) because you are then in a vacuum where there is no creativity and everything that you can take in your army is rigidly constructed by GW.  I do not want this to happen.

The fun of constructing many different types of armies, where the squads are customized to how you want them and your characters are unique creations of your own design is what I have loved about 40k for years.  To have this aspect of the game taken from me in the name of balancing the game is not a good thing.

Once again i play 40k not clix and not warmachine (no offense to anyone who plays those).

Posted By WarsmithMorgoth on 04/19/2007 4:28 PM

The fun of constructing many different types of armies, where the squads are customized to how you want them and your characters are unique creations of your own design is what I have loved about 40k for years.  To have this aspect of the game taken from me in the name of balancing the game is not a good thing.

Once again i play 40k not clix and not warmachine (no offense to anyone who plays those).

QFT.

Maybe its a step in the right direction with the DA codex and just fixing the abuses of the Marine list but not nerfing them to the point of the absurdity of the 3rd edition codex. Just mainly points tweaks. Balancing takes a while and maybe they are trying to stop this codex creep that peaked with Codex eldar.

Rygoth, the fact that DA suck is entirely your opinion and there are plenty of people who are happy with the new codex (myself included, I too have been playing since 2nd ed). The problem I have with your post and posts like it, is that you start railing against DA and then go off on a tangent and lament all changes that have been made since 2nd or 3rd ed. Your argument is fallacious and the things that you seem to hate most about the DA codex (loss of modeled options) have been happening in every edition with every new codex.

Therefore, you = get over it.

Ozymandias, King of Kings