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.

I like this codex more than the last one. I still like the one before the last one significantly more than this one though. (Don't ask me to name what number editions they are, I don't know.) I enjoyed look at the new unit options, and wrote up several just for fun lists that utilized the new options. I would like these new unit options a lot more, though, if they didn't cost so much money. I would like to try out a full squad of warp talons, but I'm not spending that much money on them. I would love to try out some Forgefiends, but I'm certainly not paying that much money for them. If I could try out these new unit options without spending a truckload of money, I'd be more inclined to use them. But that's an issue with the pricing, not the codex, I suppose.

The only real issue I have with the codex is, and it may just be me, is that it seems to punish the player more and more for taking an undivided list. When I first started playing Chaos a couple editions ago, I decided I wanted to play Word Bearers, because they had a fascinating background, and were very unique. All chaos marines came with the mark of chaos undivided, and taking a mark on a unit made them better in some way, but at the cost of losing their re-roll to morale. Then marks started getting better, but being undivided didn't. Yeah, marked troops were a little more expensive, but it was always worth the cost. Now, in this recent codex, it's just glaringly obvious that an army is not supposed to be undivided. First off, I don't think the term "Mark of Chaos Undivided" is even in the codex anymore, they just get an icon of vengeance. Next, I always had an undivided demon prince lead my armies. For some reason or another, you can't have undivided demon princes now. I would think Word Bearers would have more demon princes than other chaos factions. Next, Obliterators, for example, were clearly designed to either have the mark of nurgle or tzeentch on them. I feel like I'm significantly handicapping my army for not putting the mark of slaanesh, or khorne, or nurgle on my raptors, or possessed, or warp talons.

To be honest, I don't really know what the answer is, and there's probably so few people who play an undivided legion that they won't bother making changes. I guess chaos has changed and they don't want people playing undivided anymore, but I would like some more benefits to being undivided. Maybe allow us to take an undivided mark for free or really cheap that lets us re-roll morale tests, then an icon that grants us d3 re-rolls a turn for having the god's favor, or maybe an extra special weapon upgrade or something. Just something that makes being undivided a little better. They wouldn't be as good at specific tasks as if they took the mark of a god, but they wouldn't be such significantly worse than a marked unit. But that's just my opinion, and like I said, I don't really know how to fix it. Just my musings.

 AresX8 wrote:
Oblits were 75 points base, T4 base in the previous book, the book written by Thorpe and Cavatore. I'm looking at their entry right now in the codex.

Oblits got buffed in terms of survivability since they can take MoN, and mobility due to SnP change; having to switch weapons is another matter however, it's a double edged sword.

Don't forget they're Ld8 (reduced from 9 in the last book and 10 the one before that) and lost Fearless. Punk one dude in a unit and they're running like Guardsmen. Not much has changed in terms of mobility, they're still slow.

So they got a 5pt discount and the ability to become T5 by becoming more expensive than they were before, but went from Fearless to Ld8 and use the same weapon two turns in a row. A rather painful nerf overall, as they were hardly overpowered before, just the preferred choice because all the other options were generally worse.

/sigh


I REALLY wanted to like this book and had high hopes when i first got it.

For me the test has been playing games against an IG friend of mine. For 4 years i never lost a single game to him - admitedly his tactics blew but anyway...

I'm not saying none of it is my fault - my dice rolling has been pretty horrendous -


I think my previously trusty Iron Warriors have been put in my "apoc games" cupboard.

Praxiss: The new codex is certainly better as a whole than the old one. But if you use some specific units like infiltrating Chosen or Obliterators, the old 'dex was better.

The only real issue I have with the codex is, and it may just be me, is that it seems to punish the player more and more for taking an undivided list.

That's one of the biggest weaknesses of the book imo. It punishes you for playing an undivided list, but then makes sure that the only mono-god list that won't completely suck is the same old Nurgle list.

Also, to those who keep saying Warp Talons are GOOD at what they do - Really? Have you actually played with them? Serious question here. No sarcasm intended (ok maybe mild sarcasm intended) but I would really like to hear real stories of them successfully deep striking without scattering, blinding their intended targets AND making into the charge to cc without getting wiped out. The entire unit is based on 4th ed game mechanics and belongs in a codex where we have deep strike beacons that work without the need for one of our characters to do the hokey pokey and sacrifice a chicken before the deep striking unit arrives. EPIC fail imo.

I agree it does hurt a chaos undivided list. I am a little divided on it. I have been playing since rogue trader and I am a big fluff person, so as the chaos gods are always fighting against each other to vie for power and in second edition most things you could only take one faction or bits of another faction with a main one faction (example Orks, Chaos, Eldar), that I thought the meshing of everything that started in 3rd edition was not cool. It made it a lot easier to get the best of everything. When you had to choose factions you got their strong points but also their weak, so everyone was a little bit more even. Example if you took Goff, you didn't get access to lootas as they were blue skulls, Bad Moons had access to more stuff because they had more teeth, Evil Sunz had more vehicles, etc.
That being said, things are not written that way any more. If this is how the new codexes are all going to be, then I am fine with that. However, I know Matt Ward and my guess is that Dark Angels will be the second coming, making this codex really, really bad and overpriced. I guess we will see. Even if this codex is a way of things to come, it will make Necrons the king of 6th Edition.

 Eiluj The Farseer wrote:
I agree it does hurt a chaos undivided list. I am a little divided on it.

Back on topic: Necrons will get pushed down a peg if a Codex actually gets useful AA, as opposed to one flyer and a static infantry unit that'll get shot to pieces before they have a chance to attack enemy fliers.

If you are comparing the new Chaos codex to IG then your always going to be disappointed. Nothing, not even GK and Necrons come close to IG's OPness. Of course you'd expect GW to continue to codex creep but unfortunately they didn't.

Overall the CSM is alright not great though. I see my Chaos force as painting and modeling project that takes a bit of tactics to pull off a win other than a auto win army.

 Nakor The BlueRider wrote:
If you are comparing the new Chaos codex to IG then your always going to be disappointed. Nothing, not even GK and Necrons come close to IG's OPness.

The metagame and tournament results of the last few years would disagree with that assertion, unless you're obligingly deploying in neat little clumps in the open and your opponent is always getting first turn and you never bother to advance...

Anybody that is crying over the new Chaos Codex needs to learn to play. I would suggest studying the codex
in more detail, and getting lot's of games in. Also, it would greatly benefit CSM players to also begin collecting
Daemons for various combinations between the two books.

It is awesomely good if you know how to use it. Especially against other power armour armies.

Firstborn wrote:
Anybody that is crying over the new Chaos Codex needs to learn to play. I would suggest studying the codex
in more detail, and getting lot's of games in. Also, it would greatly benefit CSM players to also begin collecting
Daemons for various combinations between the two books.

It is awesomely good if you know how to use it. Especially against other power armour armies.

It is always easy for someone who could be 16 for all we know, with 76 posts on here to brag how good they are... Joking aside, there are plenty of us that know how to play here, unless you are insinuating that you are better than anyone that has posted on here. I am not saying this and I have been playing since GW threw out rogue trader as kind of a joke of their fantasy game. Talking smack is easy. What do you do in a game that makes you such a winner.
In addition. If you have to take another codex ally to consistently win, then I do not believe it is a good codex, if it can not stand on its own. Necron, IG, Gray Knights can easily do this. Eldar, Tau, Sisters can not easily do this.

I like Chaos as well, but I think with an old codex it does just fine by itself. It is not so easy with the new CSM codex. I like that it is not All Abbadon all the time.... lol

I like this codex. I think its a great codex. I do not think its the OMG this is awesome sauce codex that a lot of people were hoping for.

I like that my fearless guys stay fearless. I like that my MOS guys stay Slannesh all the time and not just because of some damn banner. I like that I can get (albeit with allies) actual damonettes to use for my daemons instead of those lesser daemons junk.

I like the Heldrake, I like the fiends (but don't use them). I do wish the DP was cheaper in points, but I'm not that bothered by it only being T5 with no EW. Thats how my 3.5 ed. DP was, so nothing new here. Yeah I wish the cult special weapons could be carried over to marked CSM units, but your not going to have everything. I like that spawn are now usefull. I like that my bikers are once again usefull. I do wish there was more veriety in Daemon weapons and/or deamonic wargear gifts.

Its been a long time since I played my EC (totally ignored 4th ed codex). So its nice that the army actually plays like I designed it to so many years ago.

Firstborn wrote:
Anybody that is crying over the new Chaos Codex needs to learn to play. I would suggest studying the codex
in more detail, and getting lot's of games in. Also, it would greatly benefit CSM players to also begin collecting
Daemons for various combinations between the two books.

It is awesomely good if you know how to use it. Especially against other power armour armies.

Way to not read the thread and be unnecessarily condescending at the same time!

The issue isn't that it can't be played with. It's that fundamentally it's a weak effort that feels less well built to 6th edition than some older armies, and doesn't resolve or even address many of the issues people had with the last book. It still has internal major internal balance issues (they've just changed *some* of them up a bit), still has lots of internal inconsistencies (e.g. Slaanesh Lords can't get Sonic Weapons, Plague Terminators don't have FNP, etc), and is probably the least impressive army update since 4th edition along with Tyranids.

Yes you can build a rapeface army with it, pretty much everyone can pick out that baleflamer heldrakes, daemon allies, and plague marine lists are really really good. That's not the point.

Firstborn wrote:
Anybody that is crying over the new Chaos Codex needs to learn to play. I would suggest studying the codex
in more detail, and getting lot's of games in. Also, it would greatly benefit CSM players to also begin collecting
Daemons for various combinations between the two books.

It is awesomely good if you know how to use it. Especially against other power armour armies.

Newsflash brah, all codices are good "if you know how to use them."

Have fun winning the majority of your games against 12 year olds.

 Vladsimpaler wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


Whereas the new one is a flying monstrous creature and as such should be able to easily stay clear of any blobs. That, conveniently enough, also makes it immune to blast weapons.

Yeah it's about 200 base (195 if slaaneshi) if you're a FMC, and that's without other upgrades. And let's not pretend that it's super difficult to ground a FMC either.

Furthermore, for the price of a single Daemon Prince with wings, powered armor, and a single mastery level, you could almost buy 2 of the old 4th edition Daemon Princes which conveniently had Eternal Warrior so that they didn't completely suck.

As it is, for their price they're still too fragile.

Make it Nurgle for a 3+ Cover Save (hell, even if you don't...), give it a black mace, and no mastery level?

I don't understand the problem.

Sure, you can't sweep, but hey, you'll almost always survive to get to the enemy.

They got rid of Lash, so, Chaos players every cried.

Is this codex the next Cron or GK, no. Do I think there are more than one solid list that can really mess up the "average" list out there and be super competitive in a tournament? Yes. I really do think this Codex is underrated and people need to do some hard core tournament play testing with either a fast attack or heavy weapon specialized list to see its real beauty. Right now my CSM list would be the one I'd take to a GT.

Chaos Space Marines Feedback

Firstborn wrote:
I have had nothing but success with the new CSM book. I tabled a veteran tourney player running a Coteaz Henchmen build with it last night. I can also easily compete with hardcore Ork lists now, something that was an act of futility with the old book. Vanilla marines, blood angels, and space wolves better just stay home.

I bet a lot of you armchair generals bitching about the book, haven't played any games with it. You have read the codex and think you understand it inside and out. You don't.

And by the way, you don't need Daemon allies to win with CSM. Not by a long shot. They are just the icing on the cake, and an awesome option that seems to make loyalist players jealous. That's okay, CSM are Space Marines, just 100x cooler.

Again, way not to read the comments and come off as a condescending TFG.

You keep missing the point, or are intentionally avoiding it. It's not that it can't be a powerful book or that you can't win games with it, it's that fundamentally it's a half-assed update that left many of the major problems with the last book intact and created as many new ones as it fixed (Hooray Raptors are good...but now Oblits run like guardsmen and Defilers are incomprehensibly *more* expensive while Thousand Sons still suck!), and plays more like its previous incarnation than any codex released since 4th edition has.

TL;DR (since it's apparently needed): Almost all the changes and new stuff could have been done in 2 pages in White Dwarf instead. Not what people want out a $50 book that's replacing one of the most controversial and disliked codex's ever released.

 Nakor The BlueRider wrote:
I see my Chaos force as painting and modeling project that takes a bit of tactics to pull off a win other than a auto win army.

Mission acomplished then.

There are of course internal and external balance issues, this is after all a GW codex, but its still perfectly functional, more so than the old one IMO.

I've been trying different builds, only played 3 games with my army, but I've won 2 and lost 1. My loss was part of a 2v2, and me and a DE player got killed by a 2x Dreadknight terminator list and BA DC blob.

I like it. 2x helldrakes and 2x Dakka fiends backed up by typhus, zombies, PM and bikers. Or terminators, depending.

Firstborn wrote:
I have had nothing but success with the new CSM book. I tabled a veteran tourney player running a Coteaz Henchmen build with it last night. I can also easily compete with hardcore Ork lists now, something that was an act of futility with the old book. Vanilla marines, blood angels, and space wolves better just stay home.

I bet a lot of you armchair generals bitching about the book, haven't played any games with it. You have read the codex and think you understand it inside and out. You don't.

And by the way, you don't need Daemon allies to win with CSM. Not by a long shot. They are just the icing on the cake, and an awesome option that seems to make loyalist players jealous. That's okay, CSM are Space Marines, just 100x cooler.

Even a lame horse can get lucky once in a while.. lol

I still think that this is not a cake or OP codex, and with a codex like necrons out there it is a hard battle fought. I don't think last edition was that impossible against Orks honestly. Is it a playable codex, yes, is it ultra competitive - maybe but it has to be weilded very carefully, it is not forgiving - like Eldar (but they are playing a 4th edition dex). I have seen a great Tau player do amazing things with his Tau, did he win the Tourney, no but he finished 7th out of 30 not bad. Now take a more novice player with Necrons or IG, they will have an easier time IMO winning and being more competitive than if they ran one of the more balanced codex out there. It is GW I know, but if everyone in GW talked with eachother and made more balanced codexes, we wouldn't have anything to complain about.. lol

You ignorance is quite amazing, 1.) I bet my adult teeth are far older than you , 2.) I play competitively and play local tournies at least once a month and in a league as well. Before you go off half cocked calling people armchair generals put your money where your mouth is, instead of being TFG. My record for 6th edition is there for anyone to see with each of my posts. Where are yours? The real numbers

Chaos Space Marines Feedback

Firstborn wrote:
I do my talking on the table.

Oh man..*SO* hardcore....

I don't talk out of my a$$ on a public forum

No, that's actually *exactly* what you are doing.

You have given no specifics, no counter-arguments, no rational responses, added nothing to the conversation but "L2P nubcakes", which is ultimately the last refuge of those who have nothing to add or know nothing but how to rage on XBOX Live like 12 year olds.

and act like I am an expert player because I play in a tourney once in a month.

Welcome to ignore.

Look out, he plays a tournament once a month...we got a badass over here.

Many of us play just as often if not moreso.

Welcome to reported

Settle down everyone. Rule Number One is Be Polite.

Firstborn wrote:

 Eiluj The Farseer wrote:

Firstborn wrote:
I have had nothing but success with the new CSM book. I tabled a veteran tourney player running a Coteaz Henchmen build with it last night. I can also easily compete with hardcore Ork lists now, something that was an act of futility with the old book. Vanilla marines, blood angels, and space wolves better just stay home.

I bet a lot of you armchair generals bitching about the book, haven't played any games with it. You have read the codex and think you understand it inside and out. You don't.

And by the way, you don't need Daemon allies to win with CSM. Not by a long shot. They are just the icing on the cake, and an awesome option that seems to make loyalist players jealous. That's okay, CSM are Space Marines, just 100x cooler.

Even a lame horse can get lucky once in a while.. lol

I still think that this is not a cake or OP codex, and with a codex like necrons out there it is a hard battle fought. I don't think last edition was that impossible against Orks honestly. Is it a playable codex, yes, is it ultra competitive - maybe but it has to be weilded very carefully, it is not forgiving - like Eldar (but they are playing a 4th edition dex). I have seen a great Tau player do amazing things with his Tau, did he win the Tourney, no but he finished 7th out of 30 not bad. Now take a more novice player with Necrons or IG, they will have an easier time IMO winning and being more competitive than if they ran one of the more balanced codex out there. It is GW I know, but if everyone in GW talked with eachother and made more balanced codexes, we wouldn't have anything to complain about.. lol

You ignorance is quite amazing, 1.) I bet my adult teeth are far older than you , 2.) I play competitively and play local tournies at least once a month and in a league as well. Before you go off half cocked calling people armchair generals put your money where your mouth is, instead of being TFG. My record for 6th edition is there for anyone to see with each of my posts. Where are yours? The real numbers

I do my talking on the table. I don't talk out of my a$$ on a public forum, and act like I am an expert player because I play in a tourney once in a month.

Welcome to ignore.

LOL There are so many things I could say to that. I really don't think that you read the posts. I did state earlier that I was not the best player, but I am a good player. I was just countering your 'armchair general' comment. If I was talking out my derrier I would certainly post a better record. Something that you continue to avoid, even though you are such an expert. Why don't you do us all a favor and stop posting on here or post some useful and constructive comments, instead of just slamming people.
Something like - I think this codex is the best thing since sliced bread because............................. Instead of it is a great codex and anyone who thinks otherwise are armchair generals.. lol
Most people on here voice there complaints or compliments but follow it with ' I like Oblits bebecause they have Mark of Nurgle Now' or 'I don't like oblits because they are not fearless now'

But What 'evs

Chaos Space Marines Feedback

Firstborn wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Firstborn wrote:
I do my talking on the table.

Oh man..*SO* hardcore....

I don't talk out of my a$$ on a public forum

No, that's actually *exactly* what you are doing.

You have given no specifics, no counter-arguments, no rational responses, added nothing to the conversation but "L2P nubcakes", which is ultimately the last refuge of those who have nothing to add or know nothing but how to rage on XBOX Live like 12 year olds.

and act like I am an expert player because I play in a tourney once in a month.

Welcome to ignore.

Look out, he plays a tournament once a month...we got a badass over here.

Many of us play just as often if not moreso.

Welcome to reported

There are two sides to the bitching.

1 - The CSM codex is not effective on the table. [This is utter hogwash and I have had enough of it]
2 - The CSM book was a rushed effort and has internal problems. Mutilators, wargear options, etc.

For option #2; okay we get it. You post the same bitching rants about the CSM book in every one of these threads that come up. I am tired
of reading it every week. Complaining about it isn't going to change anything. Honestly, GW doesn't care what your feedback is. It is what it
is. If you like it use it, if not oh well.

How is 1 hogwash, have you stated how... hmmm nope
No one is forcing you to read this post or even comment on it...

Firstborn wrote:

There are two sides to the bitching.

1 - The CSM codex is not effective on the table. [This is utter hogwash and I have had enough of it]
2 - The CSM book was a rushed effort and has internal problems. Mutilators, wargear options, etc.

For option #2; okay we get it. You post the same bitching rants about the CSM book in every one of these threads that come up. I am tired
of reading it every week. Complaining about it isn't going to change anything. Honestly, GW doesn't care what your feedback is. It is what it
is. If you like it use it, if not oh well.

Nobody is forcing you to read or comment on such threads. You are reading and engaging in the situation by entirely your own will. You have to choose to click on the link and choose to read the thread.

If you are tried of reading it...don't? Coming and posting what amounts to nothing but "L2P" posts certainly isn't going to do anything but get you flak.


And we'll continue talking about it because, well, that's what internet message boards about plastic toy soldier games are for.

 AresX8 wrote:
Oblits were 75 points base, T4 base in the previous book, the book written by Thorpe and Cavatore. I'm looking at their entry right now in the codex.

Oblits got buffed in terms of survivability since they can take MoN, and mobility due to SnP change; having to switch weapons is another matter however, it's a double edged sword.

and loss of fearless.

the weapon changes suck but at least you get assault cannons

 Exergy wrote:

 AresX8 wrote:
Oblits were 75 points base, T4 base in the previous book, the book written by Thorpe and Cavatore. I'm looking at their entry right now in the codex.

Oblits got buffed in terms of survivability since they can take MoN, and mobility due to SnP change; having to switch weapons is another matter however, it's a double edged sword.

and loss of fearless.

the weapon changes suck but at least you get assault cannons

The mark is cool and the non-fearless is not good, but I found with squads of 2 and veterans of the long war (which for 3 points each is ridiculous) makes them allright, even if they fail morale, and I have done this multiple times, at least they get their normal LD to rally which fortunately I have always been able to get
The alternating weapons I thought would really suck, but honestly with the weapons available I have not really found it hindering... I have hardly used the assault cannons, but I usually use lascannon and plasma cannon at range and TL plasma or Melta or flamer when close in.... I still run them in almost every game.. I thought I would really love Mark of Tzeench, but I find myself almost always using mark of Nurgle for the toughness buff. Cheers all