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.

And are they worth playing.?

Hi :-) It's been quite a long time since last I played.. So I was wondering if it is still possible to play Iron Warriors, and if it is worth it.?

Playing csm in general is a bad idea, and playing something else then EC is madness. They should get a book soonish though, and who knows what they will end up with as the good build and the bad build. In general unless they have some super powerful synergies and extra rules on their csm, it will be rough.
The game is not well suited to playing regular marines right now, even if they have 2W.

Ignore Karol, daemons bane - he plays in a Gaming Hellscape where anything that isn't bleeding-edge optimised isn't worth playing.

Now, in answer to your question - yes, Iron Warriors are still a thing. Yes, they can be played. Would I recommend picking up the current Chaos 'dex and doing so today? No.

Reason for that is that there are a reasonable number of hints - including a segment on a recent preview event - indicating that a new Chaos 'dex is on the way, possibly in the next 3-6 months.

What've you currently got for your IW?

Depends on when you last played but Iron Warriors today are in a better spot than from 4th to 7th edition (aside from the last half year of 7th where they got rules ). They have their own rules, there's a non-Failcast Warpsmith, there's a Warpsmith on Steed, there are more Deamon Engines than ever, there are plastic Oblits available, there are MKIII Marines in plastic, there's plastic Havocs, there's the whole Forgeworld line with tanks and artillery... Overall I'd say Iron Warriors are a CSM faction that can be played close to their background and has a lot of choices to do so.

daemons bane wrote:
And are they worth playing.?

Hi :-) It's been quite a long time since last I played.. So I was wondering if it is still possible to play Iron Warriors, and if it is worth it.?

its still possible. I cant comment on the Iron Warriors specifically, but chaos marines, still being stuck on one wound (when loyalists have 2) and having a 8th edition codex still, are quite far down the "power table" at the moment.

HOWEVER, that is due to change soon. we are reasonably certain that 9th edition codex is due later this year, hopefully over summer (barring a re-occurance of the shipping and logistics issues that have plagued GW recently in These Unprecedented Time (tm)).

So, its rather hard to say how effective they will be in the near future, as beyond getting the long overdue second wound, we really dont know how the new codex will be.

 Dysartes wrote:
Ignore Karol, daemons bane - he plays in a Gaming Hellscape where anything that isn't bleeding-edge optimised isn't worth playing.

Where is he incorrect though? GW has always given garbage treatment towards CSM since 4th.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
Ignore Karol, daemons bane - he plays in a Gaming Hellscape where anything that isn't bleeding-edge optimised isn't worth playing.

Where is he incorrect though? GW has always given garbage treatment towards CSM since 4th.

A lot of the game breaks at the tournament level. Some armies can be pushed to that level, others cannot. But at a more casual FLGS, where people are not trying to squeeze the most power out of their list, you can have a lot of fun with “garbage” armies.

The Imperial authorities would give that question a hearty no. Never has been, never will be. Get back to work.

 Nevelon wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
Ignore Karol, daemons bane - he plays in a Gaming Hellscape where anything that isn't bleeding-edge optimised isn't worth playing.

Where is he incorrect though? GW has always given garbage treatment towards CSM since 4th.

A lot of the game breaks at the tournament level. Some armies can be pushed to that level, others cannot. But at a more casual FLGS, where people are not trying to squeeze the most power out of their list, you can have a lot of fun with “garbage” armies.

You'd have a point if CSM were at all close to middling, but unless you have an opponent making bad decisions for F U N you need a better defense than the crummy usual "but outside tournaments!!!!1!"

 Nevelon wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
Ignore Karol, daemons bane - he plays in a Gaming Hellscape where anything that isn't bleeding-edge optimised isn't worth playing.

Where is he incorrect though? GW has always given garbage treatment towards CSM since 4th.

A lot of the game breaks at the tournament level. Some armies can be pushed to that level, others cannot. But at a more casual FLGS, where people are not trying to squeeze the most power out of their list, you can have a lot of fun with “garbage” armies.

As CSM player, I beg to differ. It really isn't fun getting tabled turn 1 or 2, and feeling like there wasn't anything you could have done to prevent it.

Now now, you do have a chance against Guard as long as the opponent isn't running the most optimal list (and you'll still have a chance due to secondaries).

I get what you are saying. Not going to deny that codex creep is a real thing and CSM is way behind the curve. To get a fair game out of a situation like that the chaos player is going to have to put together a fairly tight list from the resources they have available. Their opponent is going to have to keep a foot on the brakes to stop things from skyrocketing.

I had to do similar things from the other side when playing my eldar at the hight of their cheese. Took some work to get a fun game, but managed.

 Nevelon wrote:
I get what you are saying. Not going to deny that codex creep is a real thing and CSM is way behind the curve. To get a fair game out of a situation like that the chaos player is going to have to put together a fairly tight list from the resources they have available. Their opponent is going to have to keep a foot on the brakes to stop things from skyrocketing.

I had to do similar things from the other side when playing my eldar at the hight of their cheese. Took some work to get a fun game, but managed.

If my opponent has to roll dice to choose their units for a fair game against my CSM force, there's no point to playing CSM.

That's why I encourage they paint Iron Warriors but use whatever Marine rules they want. No reason to punish yourself for choosing the wrong color scheme, or punish your opponent with telling them not to bring certain units they might like because it's considered unfair.

 Nevelon wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
Ignore Karol, daemons bane - he plays in a Gaming Hellscape where anything that isn't bleeding-edge optimised isn't worth playing.

Where is he incorrect though? GW has always given garbage treatment towards CSM since 4th.

A lot of the game breaks at the tournament level. Some armies can be pushed to that level, others cannot. But at a more casual FLGS, where people are not trying to squeeze the most power out of their list, you can have a lot of fun with “garbage” armies.

Even outside tournaments, CSM are pretty bad and difficult to win with. My local friendly games have a lot of Tau, Custodes, Eldar/harlequins and even a bad list from those books will usually trash even the best lists from Codex CSM. Flying to LVO isn't the only way you're going to encounter strong armies.

Arcanis161 wrote:
Now now, you do have a chance against Guard as long as the opponent isn't running the most optimal list (and you'll still have a chance due to secondaries).

Okey but that is like saying a one armed wrestler has an okey chance to win vs a one armed wrestler who also happens to be unable to walk.

Even if my meta is different, and I assume all metas are. CSM right now are in a horrible state. No one knows if IW are going to be good or bad. And a codex update doesn't mean you get a good and fun list to play with. Just ask an imperial fist player how he is doing right now. And even if one were to make the most optimal non EC csm lists, which also happens to be an IW list, it would probably be a list with a lot of machines and cultists, and not that many actual IW in it.

An IW list would lose to an unoptimised marine list right now, just by virtue of having half the wounds on everything csm. Assuming one would want to use actual csm in their csm list.

@OP CSM still aren't fun in any way currently but with the new Codex coming out soon they will hopefully be able to be fun to play again.
If not then HH is always an option, IW are quite enjoyable.

I guess the true first question is:

"do you play in a group that likes to run netlists and powergame?" While people give Karol a hard time, I came from that hellscape, only located across the ocean, so I know the communities that carbon copy adepticon lists are a thing, and are not an uncommon thing at that.

If the answer is yes - then avoid the CSM. Unless you dont care about the game result and are there just to chuck dice and lol.

If the answer is sometimes - then see the above statement.

If the answer is your group all know how to tone down and will work with you to have good games even though your codex is an abysmal flaming garbage fire and has been for a great many of years and editions, then yeah the modeling and background of the Iron Warriors is awesome.

There is no answer on this earth for how a game company can let factions like CSM and Iron Warriors be so putrid for so long and not do anything about it. I guess its hard to care when your customer base continues backing in dump trucks full of cash on your door for whatever you release though so I guess thats just what we have.

Many interesting answers, which seems to boil down to a "Maybe" Last I played, was when that 4 legged siege crawler thingy came out, the one with the tentacles.. Right now, I just enjoy painting/converting.. So maybe I'll wait a few more months and see if a new codex is gonna surface

daemons bane wrote:
And are they worth playing.?

Hi :-) It's been quite a long time since last I played.. So I was wondering if it is still possible to play Iron Warriors, and if it is worth it.?

I play CSM. They're fine to play, and Iron Warriors can be a lot of fun. They have one of the better legion traits. Obliterators and Havoks are really good, marked Slaaneesh they can do some bonkers good stuff.