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.

Posted By Abadabadoobaddon on 04/04/2007 6:48 PM

Posted By H.B.M.C. on 04/04/2007 5:26 PM
Yup. Just as we thought. Want to play World Eaters? Take Berzerkers and just pretend it's world Eaters.

Assuming, of course, that the new codex still has such a thing as berserkers and not just CSM painted red.  And even then, you might have to take Kharn in order to make them Troops choices...

To follow the New Jervis Order, you will still have Berserkers as Elites, but if you take Kharn, you will be able to take them as Troops as well. 

Squad sizes will be whatever the Chaos Power's sacred number is for that unit.  6 for Slannesh... and so forth.

It makes me truely sick to my stomach knowing that I just spent all this money on getting the models together for a new Chaos army and now it will be completely wrecked before the paint is dry.  I wish I could drop the lot at my local GW and get even half my money back. 

It's almost as though you guys wish they would nuke the whole edition, start from scratch or mysteriously 'summon up' a version of the game you'll all unilateraly agree on. They haven't mastered temporal string theory. The game can't INSTANTLY be better. No matter what it will take time and practice and all kinds of things. This isn't a thing you can just do in a year, or even five years.

Grow the frak up.

I love the DA dex. As a template for HOW to present a codex in a way that is straightforward and hard to abuse, it is a great book. If every codex in the entire game from this point on is in this vein, the gameplay will get better. Will it make everyone happy? No. Did second edition make everyone happy? Hell no. Did third? It pissed off a whole generation. Did fourth? Well if you lot in this thread are the census, apparently not.

So changes are coming. The PHILOSOPHY behind these changes sounds sincere. Even if it isn't sincere, the template we've all seen looks sound to me as it isn't open to blatant abuse. If, through a process of change that you guys will continue to complain about, all other codexes follow suit I believe the game as a whole will become easier to play and harder to abuse. I would love to see a 40k where you win the game on the table as opposed to during list creation. Have we become so dark that we can't BELIEVE any of this?

I hear a lot of folks lauding other game companies for their design principles. AT43 is going to bankrupt 40k. Infinity won't hurt my chequebook so I'll play that instead and screw that big company because they're all bastards. Every time this kind of discussion comes up it seems we all throw out our ability to be objective.

Of course, this post will change nothing. Some people might agree with me. Some people will probably tell me I'm a sycophant or that I should be disenfranchised and cynical. I'm a realist, I know this full well.

But honestly, this game (and ALL other games) is designed by people like us, for people like us. You couldn't find someone to spend years writing rules that weren't themselves at SOME point interested in this hobby.  I play games that originate from all over the earth. I've played games that no longer exist and own models that haven't been produced in years. I found out about and was fascinated by painting little toy soldiers since I was so young I could barely read. I DO NOT have the time or patience to be bitter about something that is my favorite and most long standing passtime. It really amazes me that anyone could.

So there's my 75 cents on this subject. To tie up this half-assed essay with an ending, I think the point I'm drunkenly careening toward is that if we could all just be less cynical and more constructive then threads like this might be more USEFUL and less COMMON.

How's this, every time we say something negative about ANYTHING, offer a compromise or solution. Offer SOMETHING positive. All this negativity makes me unhappy for the future of the hobby. If when I was eight, I'd read some of the stuff on this forum I'd probably.... well I probably wouldn't have understood it cuz I was so young. And it would probably have made me nervous. And if I walked into a game room or was taught to play in such an environment I probably wouldn't have the same fondness for this passtime that I do.

I remember when I went to the first GT in Canada. I'd only played 40k against a few friends in the past and I was nervous about playing people I didn't know (I was a teenager at the time). I was so happy when I met everyone at the event (run at Vic college here at U of Toronto) because it was like we all already knew each other. We were all stoked to play games of 40k and TALK about 40k with people. It was like some kind of big reunion even though we'd never met before. And for YEARS after that I knew the names and faces of these guys that I'd only see once per year for a weekend.

It seems to me that this kind of cameraderie and esprit de corps has gone out of the hobby.

I really hope this forum represents some kind of mental vent for a lot of folks. I'd hope that we as gamers aren't encouraging a whole new generation of hobbyists to be like this. And man, I'd hate to be a teenager going to his first GT with a bunch of bitter old farts.

-A

Posted By H.B.M.C. on 04/04/2007 5:26 PM

Yup. Just as we thought. Want to play World Eaters? Take Berzerkers and just pretend it's world Eaters. Just like the Eldar Codex and the 'imaginary Craftworlds' you have to use.

Idiots...

BYE

This is exactly what I've been afraid of. I know it's not 100% certain yet, but more and more it looks that this will be the way things are from now. Which is a shame, because if I can't play my Cult Legions then I'm out of 40k. It's sad that the Imperial Legions (well, at least some of them) get their own books, but apparently the far more diverse Traitor Legions must all come from one book... but enough whining.

Maybe the new C:SM Redux will make the new DA Codex null and void, and all SM players will have to play out of the same book? I'd love that.

Am I jaded?

yes.

But that doesnt stop me from talking about a hobby I am obviously passionate about because of the investment in time and money I have made.

The DA dex is good, well except for the layout, but thats personal preference. The problem is consistency.

Please explain to me how making the DA dex, (which again, is good, if it was on par with other dexs) in this way in the middle of an edition is consistent with the rules all other 'dexs prior to it.

if I wanted to spend money and invest time and effort in a product with such problems with consistency, I would have hired somebody from the local shop to write me a dex, as the results would be quite similar.

And yes, if they are going to go through with this, they should scrap the edition. Why? because of consitency. Consistency leads to balance. You cannot have balance without consistency. Sure, the DA dex is balanced, but in comparison to what?

So that leads me to beleive thatt in order for Jervis new Plan to work, there needs to be a fresh beginning. He is planning on the fresh new beginning, but he is going to have to rewrite codicies to achieve that. That leaves people wondering if a codex is made in the future, thatt it might get remade because of somebody (yet again thinking they can do it better, again) coming around and rewriting the codex.

Again, a problem of consistency.

The only consistent thing GW seems to be showing me lately is how fickle and inconsistent they are.

If Jervis' New Plan is the pattern of what is to follow, i welcome it. But I have my doubts that it will be consistent because of how they change their minds at nearly every crossroads. You get sick of people whining, I get sick of investing time and money into something that shows me that they cannot stick to a single plan.
Every game goes through pitfalls, but most games I have played stick to a plan unless it is obviously broken.

The SM codex is not obviously in need of remaking, just because as Jervis said that there isnt any pictures of a bolter in it to show a kids what a bolter looks like. The kid can look in the rule book for that.

You want compromise? Consistency is my compromise. gak or get off the pot, but either way stick with a single plan and dont change course in the middle because Jervis is mentally constipated.

The reason I have Crimson Devil quoted in my sig is so that when people make posts like yours, they have some idea of why there is a larger sense of discontent than ever before.

 " Dakka is a noisy group of disenchanted believers who want some changes made to better the system and are labelled heretics for breaking with the faith. ~Crimson Devil~"

First, many thanks to Yakface for the information. The coming three months may prove to be interesting.

Second, in response to the comment "As a template for HOW to present a codex in a way that is straightforward and hard to abuse, [Codex: Dark Angels] is a great book." Yes and no. The presentation is certainly cleaner and limits creative interpretation of how to equip characters. At the same time, that is its fault. For example, characters no longer have access to a list of wargear - I believe that limits the variety of characters I will face. Boring! And Dark Angels troops are now units of five or ten, much like how they're sold in boxes. Not exciting. Combined with the redundant information in the book... Yawn! Now I have to check two places to answer my questions on a single unit. *sigh*

In my eyes, Codex: DA is another step in dumbing-down the game - choice and variety are removed and the units that remain are cookie-cutter and designed to correspond with how the models are sold.

Maybe it's not all doom and gloom. Perhaps it's not the dumbing down of the game, but the dumbing down of Space Marines and turning their ilk into introductory armies. Is this the direction we'll see future Codicies go?

Oh god oh god oh god please jesus let them actually RELEASE an Ork codex this christmas...I've been waiting too *fudge*ing long...
Seriously, if this turns out to be bull...I'm gonna be actually upset. Stupid to be upset about a game, but there it is.
And no more 8 year gaps? Did he actually mention the ork codex specifically? Because I'd love to have heard that. An admission of guilt. I'll forgive them, if they actually do it, but I ain't never gonna forget the long dark teatime of the soul that has been playing orks in 4th edition.

Posted By fleshcross on 04/04/2007 10:58 PM
This is exactly what I've been afraid of. I know it's not 100% certain yet, but more and more it looks that this will be the way things are from now. Which is a shame, because if I can't play my Cult Legions then I'm out of 40k.

I have gone to great lengths to create a modular Chaos army that has the models to do Black Legion, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors, Word Bearers, Emperor's Children, Death Guard, Night Lords and Lost & The Damned. I also have a full World Eater army.

To be told 'Yeah, sorry, these don't exist - but you can just take lots of Marked Troops and pretend to be Emperor's Children' and/or 'But you can take this special character and take Noise Marines as troops and pretend to be Emperor's Children' would really really suck - but I truly do believe that's what we'll get.

BYE

Posted By Kid_Kyoto on 04/04/2007 4:12 PM
I see it as bad news, GW's stable of armies is now set in stone forever and ever and ever. There seems to be little hope that new armies will appear or that less-interesting ones will be put on the shelf for a while to explore new avenues.

For a long-time player like me more rehashing of 80s concepts does little to keep me inteseted.

Hey it's the snotling pump wagon Mk VII!

Ditto that.

Positive:

*army lists will be maintained (theoretically)

*focus on balancing lists.

 

Negative:

*No new armies? No new concepts? Inertia equals death.

*I like the concept of traits/doctrines etc. If you take that away, which it sounds like they will be doing, they make this a much less interesting game. Everyone will have the same list.

 

Posted By Hellfury on 04/04/2007 11:06 PM
Am I jaded?

yes.

But that doesnt stop me from talking about a hobby I am obviously passionate about because of the investment in time and money I have made.

The DA dex is good, well except for the layout, but thats personal preference. The problem is consistency.

Please explain to me how making the DA dex, (which again, is good, if it was on par with other dexs) in this way in the middle of an edition is consistent with the rules all other 'dexs prior to it.

if I wanted to spend money and invest time and effort in a product with such problems with consistency, I would have hired somebody from the local shop to write me a dex, as the results would be quite similar.

And yes, if they are going to go through with this, they should scrap the edition. Why? because of consitency. Consistency leads to balance. You cannot have balance without consistency. Sure, the DA dex is balanced, but in comparison to what?

So that leads me to beleive thatt in order for Jervis new Plan to work, there needs to be a fresh beginning. He is planning on the fresh new beginning, but he is going to have to rewrite codicies to achieve that. That leaves people wondering if a codex is made in the future, thatt it might get remade because of somebody (yet again thinking they can do it better, again) coming around and rewriting the codex.

Again, a problem of consistency.

The only consistent thing GW seems to be showing me lately is how fickle and inconsistent they are.

If Jervis' New Plan is the pattern of what is to follow, i welcome it. But I have my doubts that it will be consistent because of how they change their minds at nearly every crossroads. You get sick of people whining, I get sick of investing time and money into something that shows me that they cannot stick to a single plan.
Every game goes through pitfalls, but most games I have played stick to a plan unless it is obviously broken.

The SM codex is not obviously in need of remaking, just because as Jervis said that there isnt any pictures of a bolter in it to show a kids what a bolter looks like. The kid can look in the rule book for that.

You want compromise? Consistency is my compromise. gak or get off the pot, but either way stick with a single plan and dont change course in the middle because Jervis is mentally constipated.

The reason I have Crimson Devil quoted in my sig is so that when people make posts like yours, they have some idea of why there is a larger sense of discontent than ever before.

 " Dakka is a noisy group of disenchanted believers who want some changes made to better the system and are labelled heretics for breaking with the faith. ~Crimson Devil~"

When guys like me come along..... man who is labeling who? I lumped myself in with my post (when I said we?). Wear that badge dude... it's getting less shiny all the time. Seriously.

I just want an ork codex. Is it so much to ask?
Please let it happen. And then a Dark Eldar codex. Or if you want you can do dark eldar first.
I wonder what the reasoning behind the three month window is?
Surely the more advance info on any project, the more feedback and excitement they can foster?

Achilles: I have much of the same opinion. Heck, I've only been playing for 12 years and have loads of models that I can't use anymore (2nd ed ork gunz anyone?).

A lot of the negativity seems to come from what people view as a lack of consititency. Unless (or until) GW releases a new core rulebook and every codex at the same time, this will not exist. Why do you think WHFB is on it's 7th edition? And most people agree that it is the better rule set of the two core games (LOTR I don't have any exp with).

Things change. It's a game. Even mononpoly has a new edition out now. And since 40K is a much more complex game then monopoly I expect it to have problems that you deal with and adjust to. Any two idiots can sit down and play a board game and probably have a good time, but with wargaming you have to work together to accomplish that.

And yes, please for the love of whatever you hold dear, release a new fricking ork dex (and plastic grots!).

Posted By H.B.M.C. on 04/05/2007 2:25 AM

Posted By fleshcross on 04/04/2007 10:58 PM
This is exactly what I've been afraid of. I know it's not 100% certain yet, but more and more it looks that this will be the way things are from now. Which is a shame, because if I can't play my Cult Legions then I'm out of 40k.

I have gone to great lengths to create a modular Chaos army that has the models to do Black Legion, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors, Word Bearers, Emperor's Children, Death Guard, Night Lords and Lost & The Damned. I also have a full World Eater army.

To be told 'Yeah, sorry, these don't exist - but you can just take lots of Marked Troops and pretend to be Emperor's Children' and/or 'But you can take this special character and take Noise Marines as troops and pretend to be Emperor's Children' would really really suck - but I truly do believe that's what we'll get.

BYE

Given what we've seen in the Eldar and DA codices, I'm afraid you're going to be quite right on this one...

People get into and stay into this game because of the background and "falling in love" with certain armies or factions.

When they're removed, well, it isn't a good thing...

You've got me all nervous about the future of the Alpha Legion!

Or should I say, "the future of my bluish-green army of Chaos Undivided marines who can infiltrate (maybe!) a few units, just like everyone else"...?

Posted By budro on 04/05/2007 5:22 AM
Why do you think WHFB is on it's 7th edition?

'Cause GW has learnt that people will buy pretty much anything if you put a shiny new lable on it?

BYE

Lots of interesting thoughts. Back during the build-up and post-release of the most recent Chaos Codex (2003), my personal opinion was that you had to sacrifice some modicum of inherent balance to obtain the flexibility and fun of making a crazy list. That was something I liked about the hobby because it opened it up. It also required some small level of restraint on the part of "killer list builders" to not min/max every time they played. The list wasn't a puzzle to always optimize (that had it's place, like every other game type), but to play with. To do crazy stuff.

Thanks to a few years of incessant whining and tourney focuses, it appears that GW has decided to remove the temptations. We will get smoothly (somewhat) balanced codicies, with little of the flavor that existed before. Great for the tourney players I suppose. But it does shrink the game a bit. As with everything else, we'll see how long it lasts.

The three month window - I also think this is a HUGE mistake. I have literally nothing to be excited about. Like many hobbies and activities, anticipation is a full 50% of the fun. The 3 month window completely removes that, and is yet another decision that distances the company from the players. I agree the free-for-all of a few years back wasn't good either, but people should know what the next 40k and Fantasy armies are after a release. We don't need to see every mini or piece of art, but it allows for speculation, discussion, and INTEREST.

One thing I am a HUGE proponent of is removing the 8 year gaps. A little something for EVERY army EVERY year is a very good thing. It keeps people who focus on one or two armies interested. I consider that GW's poorest roadmap policy of third and fourth edition, which they started to remedy with campaign books (or Cities of Death). Frankly, when they released 4th edition 40k or 7th Edition Fantasy, they should have had a triple AAA Hero/HQ sculpt for EVERY army. Not necessarily exactly that, but a quality release for each army. That way, EVERYONE is excited. Models drive the hobby...not rules. So this is a good (objective) change. Among some that I feel are objectively bad (the 3 month window), and some I don't like, but others will.

1-1-1,
Chuck

I am willing to bet that I have at least 100 models that will no longer be useable in the new chaos codex. if they tank the vastness of chaos i am getting out. I started playing chaos during the realms of chaos era and the possiblities were infinite. they have been shrinking ever since. That gets old.

Posted By Lowinor on 04/04/2007 3:55 PM
Does talk of what's going in to future core rules books mean that fifth edition is under development?

Edit: Or even something like a 4.5e rulebook.

Funny, as originally GW insisted on calling 4th edition, 3.5.

I personally see the changes as a good thing.

There have been more positive things said about the Dark Angels codex (on it's own) then negative. I don't think there are any 'no-brainer" choices in that codex and nearly everything is worth taking. The only problem with it is that it doesn't compare to the current SM codex in power.

They don't really need to restart the game to make it balanced. Eldar, Black Templars, Tau, and Tyranids (with the exception of Godzilla) are all pretty balanced codexes with very little bad choices (with the exception of Black Templars that suffers like C:SM in choices, but lacks the power). "Oh Eldar have holo-fields", well you can field 4 Lascannon Devestator Teams in Dark Angels as a viable option. Besides a Falcon is nothing more than an expensive taxi to begin with.

All they really need to do to tone down 40k and make all the codexes pretty balanced is re-release Space Marines, Chaos, and Orks. A goal they can accomplish by the end of the year.

From there they can start going through the older codexes and start optimizing them.

And as a Choas player the only thing I hope they realize is that the summoning rules aren't broken. They are random, unreliable, and if you couldn't move and assault, most Deamons would be worthless.

As someone who hasn't played 40k since RT days, and wouldn't touch it with someone else's, it strikes me that with all their current core games GW would do better to "draw a line" under the rules. Yeah, rehash some of the older armybooks/codices to get them reasonably balanced and then leave it at that with just FAQ/Errata reprint support.

And then move on to something else. GW seem to create as many problems as they solve and pee off as many people as theyenitice into the game with every new edition, so why bother. They should stop trying to reinvent the wheel and leave it at that. Shoot, if they can't fix a game after 4 editions (or 7) then lets face it they are NEVER going to fix the game! The game is unfixable!

By all means update models so the old fashioned sculpts get a makeover every now and again, but do they get any mileage out of these rehashes of the codices compared to the effort involved? Not if you believe the dakkites, that's for certain!

Personally I would have preferred them to diversify in other ways - maybe they should have taken on FoW and SST when they had the chance. LotR certainly worked for them well, so you think they'd understand that diversification would attract new customers. And also that they are never going to satisfy everyone with their existing core games, so shouldn't try to reinvent the blooming things time after time to no discernible effect!

The only argument I have heard from GW against diversification is that they think they would only be rob themselves of custom from their existing games.  But I cry foul on that argument - people are already buying other companies' offerings because they are bored/ticked off with GW's existing ranges, so to recapture their custom GW have to diversify or face losing their custom altogether to other companies' offerings such as AT-43, Infinity, WM or whatever.

Just my take on things as I look on from the sidelines of 40k and pat myself on the back that I haven't got burned over it.  Right now the game looks like it is one heckuva mess and there is no reason whatsoever for a new gamer to get mired in it when there are new alternative and "clean-looking" rules not tangled up in old editions/nerfing/errors to choose from.

Posted By jfrazell on 04/05/2007 4:38 AM

Negative:

*No new armies? No new concepts? Inertia equals death.

*I like the concept of traits/doctrines etc. If you take that away, which it sounds like they will be doing, they make this a much less interesting game. Everyone will have the same list.

I see where you're coming from, but an important thing to remember is that they're also continuing to do expansions like CoD and Apocalypse.  Maybe there won't be as many separate armies to choose from, but the armies you have will have more settings in which they can be used.  That's the other way to avoid inertia.  If all people are interested in is straight-up tourney style games on basic tables, well, I don't know how you're not getting bored with that anyway. 

Not that anyone here is really going to be fair to GW, but players will be screaming bloody murder no matter what they do.  The more traits, sublists, etc. they generate, the greater the chance for imbalances.  And we all know that a lack of balance in GW games is one of the biggest complaints among players.  What these comments by Jervis amount to is an admission that they haven't done a good job balancing armies. 

So now that they're changing course to address this glaring weakness, GW is getting accused of not listening to its customers because they're streamlining lists.  GW definitely created this situation...I'm not saying the organization isn't to blame.  It's just that IMO it's not fair to blame the guy who's getting stuck trying to clean up the mess.  We all know who the truly guilty designers are/were. 

Regarding the Chaos codex, I'm expecting to see at least some LatD units included.  I think it'll still be a pretty diverse list, although it'll be interesting to see if cults make the cut (note that there are rumors floating around regarding the 1KSons, which you wouldn't see if cults are completely out).  I don't think for one minute an additional codex(-ices) dealing with the cults is out of the question.  If cults are gone from this first codex, I think that just leaves the door *wide open* for future releases. 

the probelm is that GW can't expand the range. It will not fit into their little stores. That is part of their current problem. is they have to design games to fit in the stores. they lost 20 percent of the store space to lord of the rings. that basiclly took out the room for epic and other fringe games. We could add another army but what will come out of the store? is a question they have to answer.

Posted By Mahu on 04/05/2007 6:45 AM

There have been more positive things said about the Dark Angels codex (on it's own) then negative.

What rock have you been living under?  Response to the codex has been almost universally negative.

Posted By Achilles on 04/05/2007 5:06 AM

Posted By Hellfury on 04/04/2007 11:06 PM

The reason I have Crimson Devil quoted in my sig is so that when people make posts like yours, they have some idea of why there is a larger sense of discontent than ever before.

 " Dakka is a noisy group of disenchanted believers who want some changes made to better the system and are labelled heretics for breaking with the faith. ~Crimson Devil~"

When guys like me come along..... man who is labeling who? I lumped myself in with my post (when I said we?). Wear that badge dude... it's getting less shiny all the time. Seriously.

Notice how I said when people make posts like yours....big difference there big buddy. Please dont quote me out of context.

Dude, I was really trying to give your post an honest and non negative reply.  There is no lumping you in with a certain lot, but the post you made is the same old "Whining against whining post".

All I am saying is that there is a reason. I gave a reason you gave yours.

Now who is being negative?

Posted By Buoyancy on 04/05/2007 7:37 AM

Posted By Mahu on 04/05/2007 6:45 AM

There have been more positive things said about the Dark Angels codex (on it's own) then negative.

What rock have you been living under?  Response to the codex has been almost universally negative.

That just what jervis wants to beleive, Bouyancy.

He has been quoted on warseer to basically deny the existance of criticism for the DA codex, which is fine.

But ignoring criticism isnt going to be healthy in the long run.

Posted By Buoyancy on 04/05/2007 7:37 AM

Posted By Mahu on 04/05/2007 6:45 AM

There have been more positive things said about the Dark Angels codex (on it's own) then negative.

What rock have you been living under?  Response to the codex has been almost universally negative.

Did you read my post, or did you just pull out a random quote to poop on.

My point was that outside the spectre of the Space Marnie Codex, Dark Angels is a pretty good codex, and most people I have found like it in preciple just not in use. Deathwing isn't viable because of Lysanderwing, Shooty Dark Angels isn't viable because of 6-man Las/Plas of the Space Marine Codex. However, if you match up Dark Angels against Tau, Non-Godzilla Tyranids, Eldar, or Black Templars, it's pretty balanced. The problem is in the Space Marine Codex more than it is in the Dark Angels one.

 

Just because Dakka hates the DA codex doesn't mean it is universally reviled. I have heard a few very vocal dissenters, but other than that I have heard more positive than negative about the codex. I haven't heard one word bad about the dex in my gaming circle at the shop, with most people hoping the Space Marine codex gets the changes.

The Space Marines dex has a lot of problems, that if solved sets a greater tone of balance among the new codexes.

Just because you hate it that much Bouyancy doesn't mean you count as two or three people

I agree with Mahu. The Dark Angels dex is competitive with everything but the old marine dex.

The biggest complaint I heard was the lessensing of the number of assualt cannons you could have.
I though assault cannons were massively broken, but there ya go.

Aye, where I play, they think people on this board are crazy.

In fact, our leading general right now is a DA player with a mixed RW and DW force.

I refuse to believe that Dakka posters are the gold standard for rules balance, and great tactics.

What dakka posters are is a gold standard for cancerous whiners who are hell bent on ruining a hobby.

Lower amounts of assault cannons and non min maxed las/plas squads do not a bad codex make.

Hell, people here still have issues with godzilla nid armies. I have ever seen but one out of the 20 attempts actually win.

Do those nid players ALL suck? Hells no. Godzilla nids with devourer toting carnifexes just suck is all.

Posted By gorgon on 04/05/2007 6:57 AM

I think it'll still be a pretty diverse list, although it'll be interesting to see if cults make the cut (note that there are rumors floating around regarding the 1KSons, which you wouldn't see if cults are completely out).  I don't think for one minute an additional codex(-ices) dealing with the cults is out of the question.  If cults are gone from this first codex, I think that just leaves the door *wide open* for future releases. 

Remove the cults from the current Chaos codex, and add the following rule:

Devotional Cult.  Any Chaos Space Marines army in which every non-vehicle model either bears the mark of a single Chaos god or is a daemonic servant of that god is a cult army.  Cult armies may add 1 to summoning rolls and receive the first Aspiring Champion upgrade in each squad for no point cost so long as the squad has a number of models equal to the god's favored number.

And with a short, simple rule, you're missing... Plague Marines in Rhinos as fast attack, and Emperor's Children vehicle weapon swaps.

Of course, even without some rule, I'm of the opinion that "$god heavy Black Legion" is more competitive than any of the cult lists with Emperor's Children being the only close competition.  I'd be much more afraid if I played Iron Warriors, Alpha Legion, or Night Lords (and terrified if I played Word Bearers, as I'm expecting daemon summoning and/or force org chart position to change significantly) as compared to the cults.

With the marine sub-codices detailed at full codex levels, I'd be surprised to see the Chaos legions go away entirely, but meh, the cults at least don't have nearly the same level of distinctiveness from "$god heavy Black Legion" that the named loyalist marine chapters do.

If they took rending off assault cannons I'd have no problem with it, as it stands it's the best gun in the game on the best shots in the game, which is a pile of poo.
As for min maxed las plas, I love facing that.Granted, I *shock* don't play MEQ.
Watching marines blowing themselves up is always worth it. >
I have to agree with Slave in one respect, I think there's a little too much group think about what is and isn't broken on these boards, from some people at least. Whiners bent on destroying the hobby, no, that's wrong. But maybe a little skewed sometimes, yes.

Posted By Slave on 04/05/2007 8:41 AM
What dakka posters are is a gold standard for cancerous whiners who are hell bent on ruining a hobby.

If this is what you truly believe, then we can pretty much discount everything else you say from hereon out.

Hell bent on ruining the hobby? What freaking planet are you from?

BYE