What's your opinion on codex/army book creep?

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.

**King Pariah**

I like it when it is actually needed, and I do like to see the occassional new unit coming out of the blue which can change the dynamic of the game sometimes. However I think it's utter bull to do so when nothing new is required and the previous codex was fine as is.

**CadianCommander**

Codices should be used to balance out an army from changes in the game/other codices and to bring a few new things to keep people interested and exciting.

When it becomes an escalation war, it gets to a point where the game becomes crap and collapses under itself.

...seen it happen before....

I've seen it happen in RPGs and seen CCGs go that way though admittedly, the CCG didn't collapse but it's still a crap game compared to what it used to be.

**lordofthedead**

The changes keep the game fluid, but they need to make sure older codex aren't left completely in the dust, perhaps with Mini-dexes to keep it balanced

**Small, Far Away**

If it's only a little, I don't mind one book being a bit more powerful that another, you can't right all codexes to be perfectly equal unless you are a genius.

But the difference between the Necrons and the Wolves is just silly.

**MisterMoon**

To me it seems more realistic that one force would be more powerful than the other for at least a brief time during a galactic struggle. I really don't have this ever seeking desire for perfect rules in my hobby. I want to have fun, and while I'd rather win, if my marines get beat by some new army codex it's usually due to my ignorance of the new codex opposed to the new codex being broke in some way. But some gamers have a very hard time admitting this. If you want strict parity in a table top system you'd probably be more happy with a PP system. If you want a more pure and wide open table top experience then GW is the way to go.

**Trondheim**

Its a hobby for, perfekt rules arent gonna happen any day soon, so why moan and groan about it

**BoA.Raccoon**

No idea what that is

**chaos0xomega**

Ailaros wrote:I don't believe codex creep exists. If it did, then all codecies would get irrevocably better, and older ones would always be much worse. Case in point, remember how many elder players were really pissed off when they got their new codex? Clearly codex creep and eldar feeling nerfed conflict. Likewise, the new chaos codex was universally derided when it came out. Codex creep implies that the new codex is always the most powerful, while it is widely awknoledged that chaos BECAME a 2nd tier army
when their new codex came out.

Anpu42 wrote:I think that they are just getting Better not More Powerful.

I agree with this. It's not that codecies are stronger, it's just that they're cleaner, and more appropriate to the rules edition that they're in. For example, the new guard codex isn't cheesy. All they did was throw in more specialist options, and re-work it so that it was appropriate to 5th. ed. rules. Likewise, Necron don't suck just because it's old (DE and =I= are both older and aren't as crappy), but because their rules and play-style is fundamentally mismatched to 5th ed rules.

I think that what really drives the illusion of codex creep is jealousy. People see that a new codex got shiney new toys that their codex doesn't have and they immediately cry cheese at the top of their lungs. I mean, just look at how much noise was made when space wolves came out because people just looked at the new priest abilities? Why isn't space wolves the uber army of 40k as all the screaming implied? Because the space wolves actually got a bad new codex and people were only so focused on what priests could do that their army couldn't that they lost sight of the codex as a whole.

Are some codecies stronger than others? Yes. Is it because every codex is always stronger than the one before it? I really don't think the data can be read in any other way but "no".

This. I think the concept of codex creep kicked in when we went from the 4th edition design philosophy to the 5th edition design philosophy. It wasn't an issue of 'codex creep' it was a change in design philosophy which resulted in more powerful units, etc. because they wanted to keep things interesting. It was really only 'codex creep' for the first 3 codecies or so of 5th, after that the power level kind of plateaued as more books were brought up to that level and some of the design choices began to make sense in the context of other books.

**sp4cew0lf**

I think over powered armies are unfair on real armies.

**NuggzTheNinja**

Codex Creep doesn't necessarily mean that every new codex will be better than the one before it. In regards to the newer codices, neither Nids nor DE seem particularly overpowered.

Only when you have two codices that were released at different times, but are markedly similar, can you really observe creep. You see it in Codex Space Wolves and Codex Blood Angels compared to Codex Space Marines. Competitively speaking, there is literally zero reason to run Codex: Space Marines unless you really want to run Vulkan Marines or Biker Marines, which are both fairly underwhelming.

I don't buy the "they're just different" argument in regards to BA specifically. What does Codex Space Marines have that Codex Blood Angels does not? Meanwhile, BA get scoring assault squads, every unit has a 1/6 chance of raging, Fast Rhino/Razor platforms which can be bought with rebates, and superior dreads, cheaper Devastators, and Storm Ravens. I would buy the "they're just different" argument if BA simply switched Assault and Tactical squads from Fast Attack to Troops. I would buy it if they didn't have EVERY unit in Codex Space Marines (Sternguard for example?). But as it is, you can take almost any army from Codex Space Marines and, using Codex Blood Angels, run it cheaper, faster, and better in H2H.

**Loricatus Aurora**

To me codex creep is good because it incentivised new armies which are good and exiting to play

But it needs to be in moderation

Me assaulting space wolves with their 3 attacks (being charged with their counterattack) and my 2 (vanilla marines) is plain wrong

BA getting fast vehicles and moving AC/LC preds 6 each turn to get side armour whereas I need to use dreads is frustrating

Special characters in particular need attention not to unbalance the game

I have never played a SW army that did not have Njal - that says something

For me - no names characters is essential. I would prefer they stayed in apoc - logan and njal at 1750? please.

**Dust**

I have a mixed opinion on Codex Creep. On the one hand it keeps the game fresh and interesting. There's always new strategies, armies, and models hitting the scene.

On the other hand though I don't like when some armies become completely eclipsed by new rules.

**Calgarstrong**

Codex Creep is in the mind of the beholder. AND it really boils down to people understanding how to play new armies, and people figuring out how to stop those armies.

It really comes to the people playing. THIS is a hobby. No one is forcing you to play against the Thunderwolf spam army, or the all razorback/predator blood angel douche. If you choose to play that person, you should not be upset with the list. Play people you will have FUN playing against!

**LumenPraebeo**

I think that adding new units and vehicles is a good thing, but overall play style needs to remain in one constant for an army, I don't like how power and stats keep changing either.

**Hellwolf**

I don't get that question...

**Markillius08**

I personally like the addition of any new codex. My only concern is that each Codex is made to be more powerful than the last. It makes sense, but I feel GW could benefit, as could the game, if they focused less on making armies stronger and instead focus on making armies more tactical.

New abilities, new units, re-imagined rules that do not make an army over powered because of the abilities, but give the army a new lease on battfield life because of what they now have the ability to do.

For example, I LOVE the idea of the Necron Megalith. Spawns units for Necrons, or possibly splits into Monoliths. Cheesy, probably! Overpowered, possibly! But it give the Necrons something that is unique to them and also makes the game more interesting. How can my GK's combat spawning Ron's each turn?

I LOVE 40k, but I just wish they focus would shift from ridiculousness of combat power and focus more on tactical prowess of each army.

**Stunami**

I don't have any issue with giving an older amry some new rules that really gives them some love. I don't care for the extreme that it has gone to sometimes where the mere faction choice can determine the outcome of the game. I keep thinking and hoping I'm wrong about that, though.

**evildrspock**

My only dislike about it is making that old model you bought for the awesomeness of the last codex only so-so, so that you need that next big item to be super competitive. Eldar Falcons and Tyranid Carnifexes, I'm looking at you!

Clearly, they're still playable, just so lackluster compared to newer options. Give some power back to old units, too!

**Winterkit**

Calgarstrong wrote:Codex Creep is in the mind of the beholder. AND it really boils down to people understanding how to play new armies, and people figuring out how to stop those armies.

It really comes to the people playing. THIS is a hobby. No one is forcing you to play against the Thunderwolf spam army, or the all razorback/predator blood angel douche. If you choose to play that person, you should not be upset with the list. Play people you will have FUN playing against!

Unless you live somewhere where those people make up a substantial amount of only a scant handful in your area. Or the only people your schedule syncs up with. Then you're screwed.

There are plenty of people in this situation. Codex Creep increases the amount of power imbalance between different armies, thus increasing the probability that the games you play will become more imbalanced in one person's favour, and less fun. Thus tarnishing your experience of the hobby.