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.

The tyranid codex has to be the worst, certainly of 5th edition codexes.

The Fragile Breath - if you really want to understand why so many people are upset about the nid codex there are many threads that cover the numerous issues. On warseer in the general thread go back a few weeks and you will see a few threads on nids. Just ignore the whiny 'nids suck' kind of statements or over the top statements and you will find many well articulated points about the problems which you seem blissfully unaware of (maybe its for the best). Nerfing the carnifex is only one issue out of a multitude (many of us did not play nidzilla and that is not the issue about the fex).

That said strong builds can be made with the nid dex, but the common competitive builds, as mentioned above, tend to have the same stuff (and mostly the new units - tervigons, hive guard, trygon, T-fex, etc) and it is boring.

The problem with that thread is about 3/4 of it is whiny kids. Filtering out the meat of the discussion is practically impossible.

The definition of "bad" can be different from people to people, whether it be competitiveness, fluff, style of play, etc...

However everyone seem to unanimously agree CSM are the worst in almost all fields (and apparently only inching in on being competitive).

Loki, though there is certainly some whining, there are legitimate concerns/problems about the nid dex in those threads whether you agree with the complaint/issue or not. I might argue that the loss of so many carnifex biomorphs where the kit actually had the parts was a mistake and irritating while you might see it as not a big deal. When people are discussing what they do not like about a dex then that is what they will discuss.

Threads to discuss ways to use the dex and units in it to make competitive lists and find new ways to play are for that and complaining should be avoided/minimized there.

I agree that strong builds can be built with the nid dex. However, that does not change my opinion that it was a poor product for a multitude of reasons and though the new dex annoys me in many ways I am still trying different lists with different units to find ways to enjoy playing tyranids without using units such as the tervigon which I dislike.

I'll be blunt with my opinion.

Best : Space Marines, on pure content and organization.
Worst : Tau, on SUCKY organization, can't find anything!

Well, I guess it comes down to that I respectfully disagree with your opinions. If I'm blissfully unaware of some of the issues, then I'll stay that way, I very much love our current codex, and would rather keep that.

I'm going to have to say that I (personally) disagree that there can only be one competitive list from the Tyranid codex, maybe that's all people use, but then I'm going to guess they're stupid. Both my friend and I have very competitive and crazy awesome lists, both avoiding the cookie cutter style you've referenced. I do use Trygons and Hive Guard, but I avoid Tervigons, Tyrannofex, the like. Would my army be good enough to stomp everything in a tournament? Maybe not, but thus far, it has proved itself time and time again as a take all comers, show no mercy, just generally awesome army.

Also, I feel like Zoanthropes are only a no-brainer choice because tanks are such no-brainer choices. Feel free to discuss/tear my thought apart, because it is merely that, just a thought/observation I've had that might not even be worth anything.

I do not think the Tyranid codex is horrid.

Very much like the CSM codex.

Yes. Either can work.
Things can be done with the,.

Even so, I think those two are the worst. Perhaps tied for soul crushing disappointment--despite potentially useful stuff.

No, you do not have to base your CSM around fzorgle, but you WILL get to explain why not.

No, you do not need Hive Guard or Tervigons, but you WILL get to explain why not.

Not only to your opponents who rarely care, but to yourself when trying to rationalize their lack.

(Note: I have not played CSM, my attributing similarity is from the slanted view of a Tyranid player. I summarily dismissed the talk, then my codex was given a roughly similar treatment and now I get to cope.)

This again veers into the "Competitive vs style" debate. Alot of the complaints with the CSM and Nid dex are largely based on how much of the character was lost. Not many actually argue that those are not competitive. CSM are largely now "C:SM with Daemons and Cult Troops" rather than the old legion rules. There's a very striking style of play when you bring to the field a squad of 8 berserkers supported by exactly 8 bloodletters and 8 bikers, both appearance wise and tactically. It probably wont win alot of battles, but it gives your army that sense of character the new codex lacks. Same goes for the nids.

Both the eldar and orc codexes are pretty damn well organized like marines.

All new codexes have the same annoying problem: all the points and options in the back, but the actual entry and special rules are in the middle of the book. But my god the CSM codex is so poorly organized, I still can't remember what page icons are on.

I actually like the nid dex a lot, but I haven't read their fluff too much.

Anyway DE followed by IG are the best for me, the tau and necron books have a lot of potential too.

SW and BA are pretty bad mostly because wolf wolf of the wolf and bloody blood of the sanguine blood.

Fragile Breath, no problem if we disagree. I'm glad the codex works for you, especially that you are not using the tervigon and find your lists are still competitive.

About zoanthropes, I find they can be useful at times but I find their shooting too unreliable since they are short range, can be shut down by hoods, etc and need a lot of rolls to pass in order to succeed. Podding can be useful but I find that the unit is destroyed or locked in CC the next turn. Personal preference.

Ventus wrote:Loki, though there is certainly some whining, there are legitimate concerns/problems about the nid dex in those threads whether you agree with the complaint/issue or not. I might argue that the loss of so many carnifex biomorphs where the kit actually had the parts was a mistake and irritating while you might see it as not a big deal. When people are discussing what they do not like about a dex then that is what they will discuss.

I already said this. Well, more I disagree with ripping 3/4 of the biomorphs out, instead of just doing a better job of balancing them. That doesn't mean the thread on Warseer is nearly 80% whining.

Ensis Ferrae wrote:I haven't read the new DE book yet, but judging from SOME reactions, it is both good and bad, so i will hold judgement on it until i either read it myself or face it first hand.

The good reactions are from people who already know DE and can use the army decently.

The bad reactions are from people who can't step out of their 3+ armor save safety net.

Best written codex? Dark Eldar.

Worst written codex? Chaos Space Marines

Ensis Ferrae wrote:as far as fluff and composition goes, i would have to say that Guard have one of the best and most enjoyable codices to read... the worst has to be GWs version of sparkling Vampires.. The blood angels have one of the worst codices that i have ever seen... IMO there is no real downside to using their codex (so our gaming group straight refuse to play with or against that codex)

We have more expensive tanks and we have alot less options then vanilla marines, if anything ban codex our space marines always get FC and we have bolters along with our CCW/BP

I guess it has probably been mentioned already in this thread but my vote goes to the CSM codex for completely destroying the concept of traitor legions and turning all CSM into a kind of homogeneous, vanilla mess.

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:This again veers into the "Competitive vs style" debate. Alot of the complaints with the CSM and Nid dex are largely based on how much of the character was lost. Not many actually argue that those are not competitive. CSM are largely now "C:SM with Daemons and Cult Troops" rather than the old legion rules. There's a very striking style of play when you bring to the field a squad of 8 berserkers supported by exactly 8 bloodletters and 8 bikers, both appearance wise and tactically. It probably wont win alot of battles, but it gives your army that sense of character the new codex lacks. Same goes for the nids.

Well, the emphasis on renegade chapters, reavers, cults etc. I thought was actually a pretty good idea (and after all, it has been 10,000 years since the heresy, so you would expect them to be in the ascendency by now) but it was the fact the army list and rules were not expanded upon at all for them. So, they essentially just cut the old army list to ribbons, and reduced what had previously been one of the most diverse and characterful army building opportunities into something completely mundane. 4th edition codex writing at its worst, and I think something that has improved considerably in the current round of codecies (as I said, apart from the 'awesome rules for new kits, nerf rules for models everyone has' ethos pervading them).

How awesome would it have been if they had gone all out on the idea of renegade chapters, or armies who have left the Imperium? They could have had mutants in there (with a massive options list of mutations!), renegade guard, cultists, plague zombies, human sorcerors, all different daemon varieties, an expanded psychic list, different 'types' of marine chapter (representing those who have just gone renegade). No 2 chaos armies would look the same, which is exactly as it should be.

Fortunately, Forge World have recognised what has been omitted from the CSM codex and have come up with rules which do many of these things - Its just a shame so many CSM are still crying into their cornflakes and are perhaps not aware of those expanded, and far more characterful, lists (although maybe they are aware, but don't have $300 to spend on the books!)

Pacific wrote:

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:This again veers into the "Competitive vs style" debate. Alot of the complaints with the CSM and Nid dex are largely based on how much of the character was lost. Not many actually argue that those are not competitive. CSM are largely now "C:SM with Daemons and Cult Troops" rather than the old legion rules. There's a very striking style of play when you bring to the field a squad of 8 berserkers supported by exactly 8 bloodletters and 8 bikers, both appearance wise and tactically. It probably wont win alot of battles, but it gives your army that sense of character the new codex lacks. Same goes for the nids.

Well, the emphasis on renegade chapters, reavers, cults etc. I thought was actually a pretty good idea (and after all, it has been 10,000 years since the heresy, so you would expect them to be in the ascendency by now) but it was the fact the army list and rules were not expanded upon at all for them. So, they essentially just cut the old army list to ribbons, and reduced what had previously been one of the most diverse and characterful army building opportunities into something completely mundane. 4th edition codex writing at its worst, and I think something that has improved considerably in the current round of codecies (as I said, apart from the 'awesome rules for new kits, nerf rules for models everyone has' ethos pervading them).

How awesome would it have been if they had gone all out on the idea of renegade chapters, or armies who have left the Imperium? They could have had mutants in there (with a massive options list of mutations!), renegade guard, cultists, plague zombies, human sorcerors, all different daemon varieties, an expanded psychic list, different 'types' of marine chapter (representing those who have just gone renegade). No 2 chaos armies would look the same, which is exactly as it should be.

Fortunately, Forge World have recognised what has been omitted from the CSM codex and have come up with rules which do many of these things - Its just a shame so many CSM are still crying into their cornflakes and are perhaps not aware of those expanded, and far more characterful, lists (although maybe they are aware, but don't have $300 to spend on the books!)

CSM were also drastically different from that of normal SMs during the 3.5 edition codex. They had the option of getting Veteran skills, which really set them apart from the SMs, and each of the legions apart. Iron Warriors are actually the masters of siege warfare with their additional Heavy Support Choice, extra obliterators and Tank Hunters. Night Lords were the masters of hit and run with their legions of Raptors and Stealth. It really emphasised why the Chaos Legions are still around, they're just that badass. Their vehicles also had additional upgrades that made playing them very different, namely Mutated Hull, Parasitic Possession, and Dedications. 4th ed effectively standardized all of that into marine counterparts.

The worst is CSM when compared with the former CSM codex (3.5 edition),
while the 3.5 ed. codex was probably the best codex I've ever seen.

Worst:BA
Best:has to be guard and come on who doesnt love tanks.

wuestenfux wrote:The worst is CSM when compared with the former CSM codex (3.5 edition),
while the 3.5 ed. codex was probably the best codex I've ever seen.

How often I have wept when I remember the 3.5 codex, compared to the book that isn't even worth the staples holding it together I have to use nowadays...

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:CSM were also drastically different from that of normal SMs during the 3.5 edition codex. They had the option of getting Veteran skills, which really set them apart from the SMs, and each of the legions apart. Iron Warriors are actually the masters of siege warfare with their additional Heavy Support Choice, extra obliterators and Tank Hunters. Night Lords were the masters of hit and run with their legions of Raptors and Stealth. It really emphasised why the Chaos Legions are still around, they're just that badass. Their vehicles also had additional upgrades that made playing them very different, namely Mutated Hull, Parasitic Possession, and Dedications. 4th ed effectively standardized all of that into marine counterparts.

That list did spam a lot of hatred. Pete Haines (just remembered his name) got his first Iron Warriors from Andy Chambers during the Piscina V (I think first a home campaign, then expanded to WD). They became his favorite army and that really showed in the 3.5 CSM codex. The firepower they packed thanks to breaking the FOC left them marked as a no-brainer pick for people playing CSM, as far as I recall.

The same, I think, has happened to the Blood Angels. The reason I think the Codex is broken is because no where do you see the Red Thirst as a flaw. They went from shining, tragic knights (fluff-wise) into berzerker madmen who competed ferociously with the World Eaters. I still like them and most of their stuff, but if I ever played them, it would be using the vanilla codex. I like the miniatures but I don't feel like the Sanguinary Guard, for example, added anything to the army, but rather detracted from it's overall taste.

The IW weren't a no brainer, many armies were viable in CSM 3.5. Not just IW, and not just chaos.
Infiltrating Alpha Legion + cultists, Iron Warriors SAFH, multiple types of daemonbomb, multiple types of terminator+daemon wing, and enough options to make tons of fun armies. New chaos brought "this is my army: iron warrior scale obliterator use, multiple slaanesh daemon princes co-leading an army of nurgle troops" which was just as powerful if not more, but about 100x less interesting.
In 3rd ed many armies were very strong. Chaos was definitely in the top tier, but it wasn't just "this is my army list: razorbacks", there were many different army styles, and chaos wasn't alone at the top.

And at least in 3rd edition we saw actual troops on the board instead of people just pushing their parking lots around. Most brilliant marketing move by GW ever, make everyone have to double the cost of their units through transports. Too bad it made the game so bland.

Worst? Crons, they only have one troops choice, no variety, overpowered fluff and they endevor to break the rules in as many ways as possible, and they are still considered the worst army (competitively) while in 4th, they were the most horrendously tough. The other books in the gutters of the power rankings at least have variety (GK and Tau) and are humble about it, not this, "we are super duper awesome, and there is a 110% chance that we will be victorious! You can kill us but all your hard fought battles mean absoutely nothing, as you did no more than delay out invetible triumph!" gimme a break, I like the idea that even in the grim dark grim darkness, individual heroes can make a diference in the vast inky blackness of space. Thanks for undermining my hard-fought victorys with some nebulous assurance of total victory and showing me the futality of working in a cubical all day... THANKS!

Necron rant aside (poorly written codex) the best would probably be either the SM or the IG. I am going to hand the prize to the SM on this one, as it basically set up the formula for 5th ed codexes, and we all know how cool those are! (sorry nids, you don't count. :( )

Eldar/csm/tyranids

Arguably the hardest ones to write in the first place, but chaos codexii used to be magnificent (Everthing about 3rd and 3.5 CSM was better). Eldar have always been kind of bad, IMO.

Tyranids are soooo Boring. Even the thought of taking such impossibly rare creatures makes me laugh. What is fething possibility that the SWARMLORD would join a random little tyranid army? The DoM? Give me a break. It would NEVER happen.

In theory, you could argue that about a lot of special characters. But given the truly MASSIVE size of the Tyranid hordes, it seems impossible that such rare creatures would ever even fight. It's like bjorn or the sanguinor. Just a dumbass way to sell models. But in the tyranids case, that means even less..

Aren't the the nid SC's really just strains of exceptional genetic material? So this justifies multiple SC's and them dying and so on.

asimo77 wrote:Aren't the the nid SC's really just strains of exceptional genetic material? So this justifies multiple SC's and them dying and so on.

No, I disagree.

Old One eye is specifically Rare. He was technically flawed by the hive's design, and only years after the battles in ultramar was he 'revived'. There's no way there could be another. It's never even came into contact with another hive. There's no way it could just turn up randomly.

Doom absorbed countless thousands (If not millions) of souls from the malan'tai craftworld. It too, is probably just a flaw. The norn queen couldn't possibly create another one without absorbing the first one, and even still, it would require an EXTREME amount of psychic energy. See the last sentence of above^^^

The swarmlord is an INDIVIDUAL in an army of mindless monsters. It basically embodies the Hive Mind in every possible way. It is the peak of the tyranid's genetic engineering, and there can only ever be ONE swarmlord. When he dies in battle (which probably doesn't happen unless marneus calgar is around), it takes an extreme amount of energy to revive him, and at that point, the battle is lost anyway.


The Swarmlord is probably the most ridiculous character in the entire game. It's even worse than taking a daemon primarch (which is an APOC thing, iirc). The simple possibility of ever encountering him is ludicrous He should be an apoc thing.


I'm not really trying to be rude. Sorry if it came off that way

No, it's no problem at all, I barely know any nid fluff. I think I just remember someone bringing that up to justify tabletop wackiness i.e. multiple SC's. Also didn't the nids want to reabsorb Deathleaper or something in the Medusa V campaign, so they could use his camo on all lictors?

I assumed if they could do that then they could spread the powers of a unique organism and replicate it. Again I'm far from being an expert.

I haven't read the fluff for death leaper lately (on account of him being useless ), but that makes sense. I believe deathleaper was part of an actually operating hive, which means he could be absorbed.

Deathleaper is what people want lictors to be. I'd have no problem letting my opponent take them, if they paid the points.

Worst is a tie between Tyranids and Chaos, with my personal opinion giving a slight edge to Tyranids because they're going to have to live with the codex longer into the future than Chaos will. It's a brand new 5th ed codex but it stinks.

Chaos did catch the short and dirty end of the stick though, Renegade Marines guest starring chaos is just lame and I don't think they should have had demons taken out.

Samus_aran115 wrote:No, I disagree.

Old One eye is specifically Rare. He was technically flawed by the hive's design, and only years after the battles in ultramar was he 'revived'. There's no way there could be another. It's never even came into contact with another hive. There's no way it could just turn up randomly.

Doom absorbed countless thousands (If not millions) of souls from the malan'tai craftworld. It too, is probably just a flaw. The norn queen couldn't possibly create another one without absorbing the first one, and even still, it would require an EXTREME amount of psychic energy. See the last sentence of above^^^

The swarmlord is an INDIVIDUAL in an army of mindless monsters. It basically embodies the Hive Mind in every possible way. It is the peak of the tyranid's genetic engineering, and there can only ever be ONE swarmlord. When he dies in battle (which probably doesn't happen unless marneus calgar is around), it takes an extreme amount of energy to revive him, and at that point, the battle is lost anyway.


The Swarmlord is probably the most ridiculous character in the entire game. It's even worse than taking a daemon primarch (which is an APOC thing, iirc). The simple possibility of ever encountering him is ludicrous He should be an apoc thing.


I'm not really trying to be rude. Sorry if it came off that way

So, mutations that seem like one-offs in a hive fleet (because each hive fleet has the capability of growing these mutations - this is alluded to by mentioning these mutations are seen on multiple battlefields in various hive fleets)) are completely out of the question, can't be taken because 40k is a skirmish level game. And yet, Space Marines get non-special character Chapter Masters. Special, very individual leaders like Vulkan are encouraged to use. Pretty sure a chapter master isn't going to get involved in a small scrap any more than a swarmlord, let alone Vulkan, who is doing one thing only - searching for Salamander artefacts. I think you should be saying no army can bring special characters, not singling out Tyranids. At least in Codex Tyranids, they don't make sweeping, beneficial changes to the entire army list if you bring them.