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.

You're focusing on sublists, IMO. And really, I've never seen IW as Dread-focused, nor NL as Biker-based, nor AL as Biker outflankers. I go back to 2E, and they're just spiky silver, spiky navy (with lightning decoration) and spiky blue & green. Nothing more than a paint job.

It doesn't change the fact that Codex: Space Marines can build a lot of different army types, while Chaos can build fewer. Ditto Orks, Eldar, and IG.

I guess I like it when armies can do more than one thing. Maybe I'm alone in that, but being able to play the same core army in different ways seems like a good thing. You can do that with SM, Orks, and Eldar. Not so much Chaos.

I don't see it. SM can take 3 units of 10 vanilla AM, max 30 JP models. CSM can take 3 units of 20 Markable Raptors, max 60 JP models. CSM seem to be able to do more than SM. SM can take 3 units of vanilla Bikers, vs CSM units of Markable Bikers. SM take units of 5 Termies; CSM can Termicide 3 models or blob 20, Markable and Combi-gun, mixing Assault & shooty.

How is the CSM unit not more distinctive than the SM version?

You're fixated on unit variety, which I acknowledge Chaos has plenty of, even if Marines have made huge strides in some areas.

I'm saying you can field dramitically different armies with SM, compared to each other, than you can CSM. An all biker army compared to scouts and terminators compared to sternguard heavy compared to pods compared to razorback spam are a large variety of armies, not just units.

I think this issue can be cut two ways. The chaos codex good or bad as a rule book (bad); the chaos codex good or bad as a means of representing a variety of flavors (bad).

I agree with Gav. There will always be a dispute on how you slice it. Any time some one says "they should have just done...", as far how its split up, there will be someone who disagrees.

If you want to break it down to every distinctive army, you have:
Renegade Marines
Chaos Demons
Renegade guard
Cultist
Thousand Sons
Emperors Children
Death Guard
World Eaters
Alpha Legion
Night Lords
Word Bearers
Iron Warriors
Black Legion
(Non world eaters) Worshipers of Khorne
(Non Death Guard) Worshipers of Nurgle
(Non Thousand Sons) Worshipers of Tzeentch
(Non Emperors Children) Worshipers of Slannesh

and probably some more. Not really deserving of as many separate rule books, but neither are Imperial Space Marines.

The reason I think people are ticked isn't because the new rules book sucks (which is does) and people will generally accept mediocrity if its atleast interesting. Its that the previous Codex did cover most of that... and the other elements were well represented. It was cramped and open to some cheese but it represented all of those things. In an attempt to make a better rule book (which they failed at) they attempted to represent things more generally with less diversity. We gave up the best 90% to focus on the less cared about 10%.

All the armies, not just chaos have been trimmed back. I think most everyone is generally dissatisfied.

Marines have more Transports, and can take Bikers as Troops.

CSM have more Troops in the first place.

They're equal in my eyes.

Not counting the coming puppies of love (go furrballs!)
Marines can drop pod
Marines can have FA as troops (BA)
Marines can run all termie/bike forces (DA).
Marines can run effectively landraider mechanized (vanilla, DA, GK)
Marines can use the heavy rhino mechanized variant with multiple vindicators.

Having said that, I'll admit I haven't seen much outside of the multiple landraider type or drop pod heavy type in some time, but thats likely local metagame. However, I've not even heard of anyone playing chaos marines outside of a multilash type.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Marines have more Transports, and can take Bikers as Troops.

CSM have more Troops in the first place.

They're equal in my eyes.

Really? You don't see any difference in play style between bikes as troops and more kinds of marines as troops? None at all? You can't think of any way that armies can be built differently, no way there are more ways to play the same codex?

I really don't see how he can say if we did this it would be 400 pages when if I remember correctly 3.5 did do this and uh it wasn't 400 pages.

How many pages is the Imperial Guard Codex?

What about the Space Marine Codex?

Frazzled wrote:Not counting the coming puppies of love (go furrballs!)
Marines can drop pod
Marines can have FA as troops (BA)
Marines can run all termie/bike forces (DA).
Marines can run effectively landraider mechanized (vanilla, DA, GK)
Marines can use the heavy rhino mechanized variant with multiple vindicators.

Having said that, I'll admit I haven't seen much outside of the multiple landraider type or drop pod heavy type in some time, but thats likely local metagame. However, I've not even heard of anyone playing chaos marines outside of a multilash type.

I played World Eaters up until 3.5 so had I kept my army for the current 'dex I wouldn't have multi-lash as it's unfluffy and unthemed for my army I used to own. I sold my Chaos army 4 months into 3.5 'dex because it, to put it bluntly, sucked my ball sack. The new codex makes taking 6x8 zerkers in Rhinos viable again. Rhinos were way too easy to pop in 4th and there was also a 1 in 6 chance (2 in 6 chance if you took that gift for the champion which you almost always had to do since if they frenzied out of the rhino odds are they'd be on foot the rest of the game so might as well increase the chance they have of getting the extra d6) of hopping out of their ride and running at stuff. Let's just say fast vehicles leading 1/2 my army in a game of "chase the landspeeder/bike/transport alll day was not what I would call fun or fluffy or any such nonsense. 3.5 1k sons army sucked less than a World Eater army from the same codex.

If I hadn't sold my Chaos army it would have sat on the shelf waiting for a new book, similiar to how some Chaos players have done it under this new codex. For my army the previous codex was an abomination so not all Chaos players love the previous and hate the new.

I guess I'm the only player out there that likes the new Codex. Ah well, with no army to play anymore and no time or funds to build a new one maybe by the time they do legion 'dex (and damnit World Eaters had better be first) I might be able to afford to start one.

So, there was one rule you didn't like, and coupled with the fourth edition transport rules (which were nearly universally disliked) you decided that you hated the entire codex?

Interesting.

Frazzled wrote:Marines can drop pod
Marines can have FA as troops (BA)
Marines can run all termie/bike forces (DA).
Marines can run effectively landraider mechanized (vanilla, DA, GK)
Marines can use the heavy rhino mechanized variant with multiple vindicators.

The only thing that is unique to SM are the Drop Pods and Razorbacks. The rest is pretty meh, as you're talking about variants that might as well be spiky. Also, CSM can run Land Raiders and Vinidcators, too, so nothing special there.
____

Polonius wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Marines have more Transports, and can take Bikers as Troops.

CSM have more Troops in the first place.

They're equal in my eyes.

Really? You don't see any difference in play style between bikes as troops and more kinds of marines as troops? None at all? You can't think of any way that armies can be built differently, no way there are more ways to play the same codex?

AFAIC, no, there's no significant difference in the amount of *variety* between having a Bikes / (mech) SM / Scouts vs (mech) CSM / NM / KB / PM / TS & LDs. It's like picking at the play style between KB as Troops vs TS as Troops. It's simply not significant.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Polonius wrote:So, there was one rule you didn't like, and coupled with the fourth edition transport rules (which were nearly universally disliked) you decided that you hated the entire codex?

Interesting.

Eh, it's no different from the people who hate the current Codex for whatever particular reason.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Marines can drop pod
Marines can have FA as troops (BA)
Marines can run all termie/bike forces (DA).
Marines can run effectively landraider mechanized (vanilla, DA, GK)
Marines can use the heavy rhino mechanized variant with multiple vindicators.

The only thing that is unique to SM are the Drop Pods and Razorbacks. The rest is pretty meh, as you're talking about variants that might as well be spiky. Also, CSM can run Land Raiders and Vinidcators, too, so nothing special there.

And more of them and better ones, and skimmers. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe Chaos can pack 5+ like most marine lists can.

Well, once you make the argument that there's no real difference between an all biker army and an all mechanzied army, I think we've stopped really having any common ground here.

What Mr. Thorpe argues could never be done was already accomplished in the 3.5 codex + LATD. It did not take 300+ pages. His arguement might be at least believable if he was starting from scratch, but his starting point already demonstrated it could be done, all he had to do was fix up the problems. Hell it would have been easy with only a few pages of content added to 3.5 to represent a hell of a lot more different ways to play chaos in addition to fixing up the problems.

@Polonius: Please re-read. I didn't say there was no difference between the armies. I said there was no difference in the range of variety covered by the one book vs the other.

That is, I said [-200 .. 0] covers the same range as [-100 .. 100], not that -175 == 25.

Hmmm. No mention of the lameness of generic demons?
Shockin'!

JohnHwangDD wrote:@Polonius: Please re-read. I didn't say there was no difference between the armies. I said there was no difference in the range of variety covered by the one book vs the other.

That is, I said [-200 .. 0] covers the same range as [-100 .. 100], not that -175 == 25.

It might cover the same range, but if you enjoy the breadth over depth, having large extremes is a good thing.

CSM are more extreme than SM, but SM have more tech.

Personally, I despise the SM book, and see no good there, so arguing that it's good doesn't help sway me.

Don't confuse arguing that the SM is "good." Its being argued that the current SM panopoly have several more viable alternative builds vs. substantially less viable builds on the chaos side. It is symptomatic of the destruction of options, variants, and choices that has befallen the chaos marine codex.

Thorpe's excuses on the subject are just that, excuses. better to have said nothing.

Yeah pretty much I mean his whole argument of if I had done this then it would have taken 400 pages and you don't want a 400 page codex!!!


Uh, what no the CSM 3.5 was not 400 pages and included rules.


All they had to do was do some balancing acts to the 3.5 instead Gav made it and was well this is just easier.


He took the easy way out and just made it Space Marine Codex + MARKS and some foot troops.

The eldar book is an even better example. Every build from Craftworld can be built in that book, with some new restrictions, admittedly. Aside from Biel Tan (because who had dire avengers?), most lists could seamlessly transition.

The ork book might be the best GW has ever done, with tons of options for units and builds. You see more variety today than you did before the new book.

And as for extremes, I'm not sure which is more extreme. You seem to saying that the Chaos Troops are like five different fillings for burritos, while I think the basic beef and chicken of the SM troops, served as tacos or enchilladas, provide more truly interesting variety. At the end of the day, you're still eating a burrito every time you play chaos, while you can hide the fact that you're eating chicken again pretty well.

If we're talking Mexican:

SM have only plain chicken (SM) burritos, but they can also have their bland chicken as soft tacos (Razors), enchiladas (Pods), or quesadillas (Bikes). No matter what, SM are always plain chicken, no sauce.

CSM have the choice of chicken with Salsas (Marks); along with Carne Asada, Carnitas, Machaca & Chorizo (Cults) burritos, and a side of dirty rice (lesser Daemons). CSM are pretty much always burritos.

Either way, you need to decide if you only want to eat chicken, or if only burritos are prefereable. But the idea that you can have beef Fajitas simply isn't valid under either book (it's Necrons).

And with that, I'm breaking for lunch to grab a burrito...

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Marines can drop pod
Marines can have FA as troops (BA)
Marines can run all termie/bike forces (DA).
Marines can run effectively landraider mechanized (vanilla, DA, GK)
Marines can use the heavy rhino mechanized variant with multiple vindicators.

The only thing that is unique to SM are the Drop Pods and Razorbacks. The rest is pretty meh, as you're talking about variants that might as well be spiky. Also, CSM can run Land Raiders and Vinidcators, too, so nothing special there.
____


Ah, so you've finally joined us in agreeing that C:CSM is merely Codex: Spiky Space Marines.

Hollismason wrote:

All they had to do was do some balancing acts to the 3.5 instead Gav made it and was well this is just easier.

I agree. I felt that systems like Doctrines, Traits, and the Books of Chaos made the game more interesting and fun. Now my IG could have my standby Creed in command, while Marbo and Straken blow things up. Not to say this couldn't happen, but a little rule supported fluff respect would be nice.

On a side note, 2 out of 6 of my local opponents are users of this 'dex. Both play extremely different armies, and have fluff within arms reach. The dex is doable, but there's nothing stopping them from pulling out 2 Lashes any given game. I hate seeing lash bull people into 'Zerkers more than any other use. That is a easy thing to fix imo.

I pine for the days of the Fluff dominated codex...

Even though there is lots of diversity in the Chaos Codex, they don't work the same way anymore. Everything is more expensive, cult armies doesn't work as good anymore, the elite choices are rather rubbish... nah...*whine*
Maybe I was just to used to the candy jar that was the last Chaos Codex. HQ is nerfed, priced up and doesn't really get anything special, atleast before they had veteran skills and all kind of twinks. Infilitrating Chaos Chosen are propobly the only usefull one in the elite, always fun to infiltrate 30 marines with special weapons . Cult marines priced up and less usefull... *smells somthing* oh the overuse of Nurgle marines. Never seen one use fast attack as chaos, except daemon bombs. Aaaand obliterators obliterators and Obliterators. Everyhing is so slimed down to Vanilla. :S

notprop wrote:Seems like quite a concise measured response to me, addressed most of the general issues raised; this should diffuse this whole kerfuffle quite nicely I think.

Whats that Thorheim? Still not happy, oh dear! [puts flak jacket and helmet on, ducks]...... INCOMING!!

I am never happy, Rage fills me day in and day out! >:C!

NNFFFFHGHGHHGFFFFNNNGGHH!!

man all this talk of Burritos and Ice cream is making me hungry, what kind of mushrooms are orks? portabello perhaps? and i think eldar have a distinct smell of escargot.

In all seriousness i think Gav just missed the mark when it came to creating a chaos codex that people wanted to to play, i don't think he truly understood what the majority of the chaos players expected and wanted. he created the codex the way he and a certain segment of chaos players would want but the problem was it did not gel with the majority of his audience.

its something that all designers must struggle with, creating something that is true to your vision and that excites you or something that excites your customer base, when both of these things align everyone is happy but when they do not you must defer to the customer.

JohnHwangDD wrote:You're focusing on sublists, IMO. And really, I've never seen IW as Dread-focused, nor NL as Biker-based, nor AL as Biker outflankers. I go back to 2E, and they're just spiky silver, spiky navy (with lightning decoration) and spiky blue & green. Nothing more than a paint job.

But, in 2ed, you could have beastman, mutants, daemons, allied IG, etc. So while all the Marines were nearly the same, there was a larger slate of Chaos to choose from.

GW hasn't figured out what they want Chaos to be. Splitting it up into multiple self-contained books is, imho, a good thing. Now, if they'd just figure out how to release more than 2 codexes a year, it would fix it.

C: Daemons => Fine
current C: CSM => I'm confused. Are these guys recently renegade or heresy vets? If they're new, why do they have archaic tech? If they're old, why aren't they more skilled?
C: IG => Fine as traitor PDF, etc.

So, where's LatD? Can you make a C: Renegade Marines (Astal Claws, etc.), a C: Heresy Marines? Astral Claws should have assault cannons, etc. And if their lack of ACs is due to a lack of ammo, where are they getting ammo for the reaper autocannons? (and as someone once said, where do they get water? Just because they're chaos doesn't mean they don't need to drink water.)

GW's not figured out what they want a Chaos army to be, or at least have been slow to. As Gav pointed out, why aren't people complaining that they can't take IG with SM? In 2ed you could! The problem is they made up the Legion rules, and then took them away. If they had done something to fill that gap, it'd be a lot less painful. That they've compounded it by publishing a CSM book with far less 'effective fluff builds' is really bad.

I'm confused, why is Chaos a vanilla flavored burrito?

Saldiven wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:The only thing that is unique to SM are the Drop Pods and Razorbacks. The rest is pretty meh, as you're talking about variants that might as well be spiky.

Ah, so you've finally joined us in agreeing that C:CSM is merely Codex: Spiky Space Marines.

What do you mean "finally"? CSM have always been spiky SM.
____

dietrich wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:I go back to 2E, and they're just spiky silver, spiky navy (with lightning decoration) and spiky blue & green. Nothing more than a paint job.

But, in 2ed, you could have beastman, mutants, daemons, allied IG, etc.

GW hasn't figured out what they want Chaos to be. Splitting it up into multiple self-contained books is, imho, a good thing.

GW's not figured out what they want a Chaos army to be, or at least have been slow to.

The problem is they made up the Legion rules, and then took them away.

Yeah, in 2nd you could mix anything together, carryover from RT.

I think GW has a very clear roadmap of what they want Chaos to be: CSM, Daemons, Legions, and LatD. Each in it's own self-contained book, and in that order.

I think the problem is a lack of patience among the players. GW said very clearly that they were doing Legions, and I have no reason to doubt them. The question is how and when. 5 or 6 years from now, this won't be a problem. However, as the GW gamers has a collective memory of about 1 month, if it doesn't appear immediately, exactly as each individual gamer envisioned, GW *must* have lied! And this is why GW Marketing holds the community in utter contempt.

Yeah, it's so sad to have lost Legion rules, because Chaos players deserve more than IG, Eldar, or SM players under Doctrines, Craftworlds, and Traits...