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.

How do people feel about codex hopping?

By which I mean, taking an army modelled and painted to be one thing, and using it as another? For example: Ultramarines using the Blood Angels rules?

I'm not asking if you tolerate it or if you'd still play against it, but do you approve of it? Do you think it's a good idea, and are you happy to see it over the table from you?

You need a 'within limits' option. If its modelled and painted to be one thing, like your example, and its marine for marine, I'm fine with that, I think its a good way to test stuff out, and would be more than happy to see it over the table from myself (also, why do you ask if they are happy to see it over the table from themselves, but say you aren't asking if they'd play it?). So Orks painted up as goffs with all that orky stuff trying to use a GK dex wouldn't fly so well. However, Orks dressed up in shiny bitz with polearm weapons, helmets, lots of silver and stuff like that would be fine to be a GK army, but thats because its clearly meant to be an orky GK army.

eh. While I'd prefer to see people play the rules that go with the stuff they bought, I also feel that codex hopping is a legitimate response to GW's complete and utter failure to maintain play balance across all the factions. I think it's pretty unreasonable to insist that people who play dark angels or chaos space marines play at a constant disadvantage to the newer books, just because they don't want to drop 500$ or so to get the latest and greatest army.

It personal think that you should stick with the one main army which you put time and effort. it's ok if you are just trying that army out, but not long term.

- ironhandstraken

motyak wrote:why do you ask if they are happy to see it over the table from themselves, but say you aren't asking if they'd play it.

Well, they're different things. Just because I don't like the way someone does something doesn't mean I'm going to refuse to play them. Thats a pretty extreme step.

Ah right, in my mind 'seeing something across the table from you' means you are going to play them, so I thought you were asking the same thing. Sorry

I personally like to make fluffy armies but I don't get worked up about what other people choose to do with theirs. Fair enough Nids as Orks would get confusing but Ultramarines as Blood Angels? 98% of the models are the same.

What people choose to do with the models they bought is up to them. They shouldn't need your approval.

Kaldor wrote:

motyak wrote:why do you ask if they are happy to see it over the table from themselves, but say you aren't asking if they'd play it.

Well, they're different things. Just because I don't like the way someone does something doesn't mean I'm going to refuse to play them. Thats a pretty extreme step.

It doesn't mean an anything then really does it. The idea that you don't like the way someone does something means nothing to anyone unless you are prepared to do something about it. For example I don't like the way fish taste, and what?

If you all believe that GW can keep everything nice and balanced all the time you are going to be sorely disappointed when you realize that's how the world works.

Anyone remember 1st and 2nd edition AD&D? It took them years to find "balance" and that's was at the cost of dumbing down the game to a near-moronic state.

Learn that not every codex is going to solve every problem the same way, and you'll start to understand how this game works.nn

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:If you all believe that GW can keep everything nice and balanced all the time you are going to be sorely disappointed when you realize that's how the world works.

thankyou for that important life lesson.

Anyone remember 1st and 2nd edition AD&D?

no.

It took them years

we're two decades and counting

to find "balance" and that's was at the cost of dumbing down the game to a near-moronic state.

chess is pretty balanced, and hasn't been dumbed down one bit.

Learn that not every codex is going to solve every problem the same way, and you'll start to understand how this game works.nn

got it.

ifStatement wrote:For example I don't like the way fish taste, and what?

Well, you can not eat fish.

If someone brings up what meals they like, you can mention your dislike of fish.

If you routinely eat at other peoples homes, you can make sure they know you don't like fish.

Same with codex hopping. If you don't like it, when someone in your group mentions they are thinking about it, you can tell them why you think it's a bad idea. Or vice versa.

Yes, assuming WYSIWYG is followed, I approve of the definition of codex hopping presented in this thread.

Kaldor wrote:

ifStatement wrote:For example I don't like the way fish taste, and what?

Well, you can not eat fish.

If someone brings up what meals they like, you can mention your dislike of fish.

If you routinely eat at other peoples homes, you can make sure they know you don't like fish.

Same with codex hopping. If you don't like it, when someone in your group mentions they are thinking about it, you can tell them why you think it's a bad idea. Or vice versa.

Your right. it's a bad parallel. I could tell people I don't like fish so they know for future and don't serve it to me.

It's not the same as saying you don't like codex hoping when you're still prepared to play against people who do it. The only purpose I can see in that is to try and subscribe people to your groupthink that it's "tacky and crass."

My opinion on codex-hopping?



You made your bed, you get to lie in it.

Assuming WYSIWYG a marine is a marine. One guy in power armor with a boltgun look remarkably similier to a susposedly different guy in power armor with a boltgun. There might be minor cosmetic differences but your practically the same.

To sum it up a Space Marine is a Space Marine

I only approve of it if it's within limits, Dark angels, black templar, and CSM? Yes go ahead and codex hop.

If you're ultramarines and your hopping, you're likely just hopping because of the constant power increase, come on! Vanilla is at least Mid tier!

Especially those who hop onto SW or GK for the OP goodness.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:I only approve of it if it's within limits, Dark angels, black templar, and CSM? Yes go ahead and codex hop.

If you're ultramarines and your hopping, you're likely just hopping because of the constant power increase, come on! Vanilla is at least Mid tier!

Especially those who hop onto SW or GK for the OP goodness.

So the concept of codex hopping is OK, except when you can mind-read or guess at the intention behind it, and you don't like the intention?

Steelmage99 wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:I only approve of it if it's within limits, Dark angels, black templar, and CSM? Yes go ahead and codex hop.

If you're ultramarines and your hopping, you're likely just hopping because of the constant power increase, come on! Vanilla is at least Mid tier!

Especially those who hop onto SW or GK for the OP goodness.

So the concept of codex hopping is OK, except when you can mind-read or guess at the intention behind it, and you don't like the intention?

I am the psychic mind-reader, best thought reader in the land!

To put it more simply, if your codex is not within the current edition, feel free to hop, even if you take to SW or GK.

If you started using a 5th edition space marine variant, than no, I would not approve of you hopping to another 5th edition variance.

I use the BA codex with non-red marines. However, they are modeled correctly to be the appropriate units and I don't use them with any other codex.

I'm sure that if someone saw me playing non-red marines with the red marine codex they might think I am codex hopping, but hey

Personally, GW is expensive enough without having to shell out for a new SM army to use with a different colour marine codex so I have no real problem with it so long as the models are equipped appropriately.

The SM should all be in one book anyway.

I don't mind codex hopping as long as it isn't done simply for WAAC's purposes.

For example, if you want to represent say the Ultramarines 8th company, obviously that Blood Angels codex is where you'll get the best rules to fit that theme. However, I don't think it would be proper to then include masses of sanguinary priests, libby dreads & baal preds as those are clearly BA specific and the Ultras wouldn't ever have access to them!
I'd be okay with seeing 1-2 priests, (as every company does include an apothecary), and perhaps a libby dread because surely other chapters do have those one or two rare dreads, but imho, there's no way to justify a Baal pred as the BA's keep that a closely guarded secret.

Or else when your own codex is so behind the times that it's nearly impossible to compete with resorting to the 'one list to rule them all'. So sure, I easily understand CSM players flocking to SW's/BA's/SM's/GK's because the current 'dex has been so badly gutted it's got about 1-2 decently competitive lists. As long as their army fits the codex their using, I don't have a problem with it.
The only way I'd see it as leaning more towards trying WAAC's would be for example trying to b t why all of a sudden your World Eaters have grown massive psychic abilities and thus 'count as' GK's or similar farce.


Codex hopping pisses me off when it's simply done as a means to win all the time with the lastest, greatest cheese.

I've been thinking about starting a space marine army once my orks and de are painted and I plan to eventually be able to play it with many different marine codices. Ultimately this won't even save me much money. I'll have to buy tons of assault marines for my blood angels army, tons of grey knights for my gk army, and tons of terminators for my deathwing army. There may be a few units that I get to use in each army, but I think it will be a small percentage in the end, especially when I start planning competitive tournament lists. People don't like the idea of codex hoping because they think people will get the ability to take the current king of the hill cheese for free. That just isn't true. How many assault marines do you usually find in a dark angels list anyway, or grey knights for that matter?

I'll end up having models that usually only get used when I'm using 1 codex. Therefore, in the end I will almost have an army for each individual codex I want to play. I just plan to paint them the same color scheme because I want to. How is that any different from someone that invests in orks, eldar, dark eldar and imperial guard? Not at all in my mind. I just don't understand why someone would have a problem with my plan.

Has to be WYSIWYG ( equipment, armor, special weapons... Not heraldry)

Yes I approve. IF it suits the army background.

For example if someone turned up with a pre-Heresy Thousand Sons army comprised of earlier power armour marks from Forgeworld in the lovely red & gold colour scheme and promptly produced a Grey Knights Codex I'd be fine with it - it fits the Thousand Sons with their larger than average number of psyker chaps. It fits the background.

However seeing an Ultramarine army using the Blood Angel Codex would hardly impress me - it doesn't fit in with the Ultramarines & their Codex-centric basis.

I wish GW would scrap those extra Chapter codices, diverts too much of their time away from the other races, to the point now where it feels like 40k is comprised of SPACE MARINES!, SPACE MARINES!, SPACE MARINES! and a few races. Poster boys they may be, but I wish they'd just do one big Marine Codex with all the options in there and leave it at that. But thats by-the-by.

As long as it roughly represents your army (using same base sizes etc, not using 3 lots of 1 unit to represent 3 varied units) then counts-as/proxy is fine, though if you're going to do that (the entire model, not just a bit of WYSIWYG nitpicking) with all or most of your army then it should be only for a short-term trial.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sparks_Havelock wrote:
I wish GW would scrap those extra Chapter codices, diverts too much of their time away from the other races, to the point now where it feels like 40k is comprised of SPACE MARINES!, SPACE MARINES!, SPACE MARINES! and a few races. Poster boys they may be, but I wish they'd just do one big Marine Codex with all the options in there and leave it at that. But thats by-the-by.

As much as I love Black Templars, it is a shame that the Space Marines get Chapter codexes and yet the Farsight enclaves only gets a unique character which is only valid in 1500pt+ games.

Marine Hopping is fine or if they are modeled to fit the alternative codex, ie the Grey Knight Orks mentioned earlier.

As though you didn't spend $400-500 to build your army.

Give the guy a break.

I codex hop as you put it, but only to represent my Iron warriors pre heresy, as the CSM list is incapable of representing that.

It's not fine, all it does is promote WAAC players. Paint your stuff to your codex, or use a special pain scheme so we can't tell by looking what chapter it is. Using normal marines for GK or chaos though, I absolutely don't allow.

I don't understand why you wouldn't be...40k is an abstract game. If you want to use a Demon Prince as an avatar, go ahead.
Marine armies can be used interchangably legally anyway. Blood Angels are a Space Marine chapter, if you want to use them as such in a game you're perfectly entitled to, as long as your opponent is informed.

juraigamer wrote:It's not fine, all it does is promote WAAC players. Paint your stuff to your codex, or use a special pain scheme so we can't tell by looking what chapter it is. Using normal marines for GK or chaos though, I absolutely don't allow.

Not even for short-term trials? And I don't know why you're getting hung-up on Ultramarines being Blood Angels etc; it's not like they're using Ork Meganobs for Deathcult assassins or having 3 IG squads which are all identical apart from the number of models and then saying- "that one is a terminator squad, that one is a Command Squad, that one is a Tatical Squad with one lascannon.."

I used to be ok with codex hopping until a guy I played said he was playing Blood Angels with an army that looked like White Scars (which I was totally cool with) but he kept referencing the SM codex. He said, BA have everything SM have except more so if it's in C:SM its in BA. That kinda made me angry so I'm a little apprehensive when playing against SM players.