CSM Codex: Outdated?

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.

**stealth992**

Just Dave wrote:That's because they were their own independent armies with their own independent codices with a few of their own independent models.
However, they were simply categorised under 'Space Marines' in the online store.
They were however old, un-supported but much-loved armies that were revamped and simply moved in the online store to have their own category. Its simply the same thing that happens with every new army, except this time they had a change in label in GW's online store. That is all.

I'd really recommend knowing what you are talking - or more importantly - complaining about before you say it...

Well I appreciate the recommendation. But unfortunately that is the way with information. You don't know what you don't know until you know it. So you can't blame me for being ignorant. Because everybody does it. And if you don't think you've done it before that's because you haven't realized you are ignorant yet. And if people don't talk about stuff with each other and show each other they are wrong or spread information, then knowledge will never progress. But all that aside, the question still remains then-

Do you think it was the best choice for GW to 're-do' SW and BA before re-doing some of the other, more 'mainstream' armies?

Because there are a lot of armies here. And obviously they don't update often. Making SW and BA mainstream is going to make SW and BA fanboys happy but also create more fanboys. So now we have even more mainstream armies. To me what this is going to do is make it even more difficult for GW to keep the game balanced for every army. But it seems like keeping the game balanced is not GW's priority. What their priority seems to be is making money. People are going to get sick and tired of playing a cookie cutter army, or a non-competitive army. People are going to get tired of playing with out dated models. So what makes more money than re-doing models and codex's? Force people to invest in building a brand new army while they put their outdated army on the shelf until a new release.

**Polonius**

I don't think you're understanding: space wolves and Blood Angels have always been "mainstream."

The very first codex (if 2nd edition) was wolves...

**Samus_aran115**

Hmm. I don't really have any problems with it. EW would be nice on the special characters, but I think 4th edition in general lacked a lot of EW guys, so no big deal.

Predators and vindicators have their uses. AV 13 is nothing to scoff at. A vindicator is a staple in lash prince lists. Predatos can kick a lot of ass with Daemonic possession. They're exactly the same as their loyalist counterparts, which see action all the time.

Defilers are rape-age. They're basically what everyone wants out of chaos Dreadnoughts, to be honest.

I'll agree, possessed, spawn and chosen are basically useless. They're just fluffy options. Possessed would be much better if they were:

5 0 5 5 1 5 2 10 3+ 5++

They really should be an upgrade to a champion as well. Possessed never work in groups in the fluff. But that's just me.

The chaos land raider used to be exactly the same as the loyalist one in the 3.5 codex. It was pretty useful then, and still is. It's still a pretty good gun-tote.

Obliterators...Haha. I'm tempted to say that they need a "Obliterator lord' HQ choice, plus an option to upgrade a vehicle with Obliterator tank weapons. Hear me out:

Obliterator Tank upgrade: 75 points
The tank can fire any of the following weapons, once per turn, blah blah
- Plasma Cannon
- Lascannon
- Demolisher cannon
- Battle Cannon

Okay, so there's my thoughts on them.

Just use a combination of old chaos codex rules. I've been playing a primarily 3.5 dex army. I use the 4th edition cost for regular CSM units and raptors.

**Lint**

I really, really like your idea for obliterator tanks/chanpions...

**Just Dave**

stealth992 wrote:
Just Dave wrote:That's because they were their own independent armies with their own independent codices with a few of their own independent models.
However, they were simply categorised under 'Space Marines' in the online store.
They were however old, un-supported but much-loved armies that were revamped and simply moved in the online store to have their own category. Its simply the same thing that happens with every new army, except this time they had a change in label in GW's online store. That is all.

I'd really recommend knowing what you are talking - or more importantly - complaining about before you say it...

Well I appreciate the recommendation. But unfortunately that is the way with information. You don't know what you don't know until you know it. So you can't blame me for being ignorant. Because everybody does it. And if you don't think you've done it before that's because you haven't realized you are ignorant yet. And if people don't talk about stuff with each other and show each other they are wrong or spread information, then knowledge will never progress. But all that aside, the question still remains then-

Do you think it was the best choice for GW to 're-do' SW and BA before re-doing some of the other, more 'mainstream' armies?

Because there are a lot of armies here. And obviously they don't update often. Making SW and BA mainstream is going to make SW and BA fanboys happy but also create more fanboys. So now we have even more mainstream armies. To me what this is going to do is make it even more difficult for GW to keep the game balanced for every army. But it seems like keeping the game balanced is not GW's priority. What their priority seems to be is making money. People are going to get sick and tired of playing a cookie cutter army, or a non-competitive army. People are going to get tired of playing with out dated models. So what makes more money than re-doing models and codex's? Force people to invest in building a brand new army while they put their outdated army on the shelf until a new release.

I agree, that is the way things go with information, however I still think you should really know what you are on about before you make such damning comments about someone/something. I acknowledge that everyone's been ignorant, I have too, however it's how you cope with this ignorance and attacking something you know little about isn't the way to do it. Hopefully, as you've said, your knowledge will have "progressed" now to acknowledge that GW aren't completely ignoring CSM and now atleast do have some of their priorities straight, considering right now it's mostly the oldest Codices being redone.

BA and Space Wolves always were 'mainstream' armies. They weren't the biggest and they aren't as popular as CSM, however they do have a large fan-base, role in fluff and recieved even less support from GW than CSM did.
As a business, GW's priority is - sadly - to make money. Whilst that more and more harms us - the fanbase - due to price-rises and the like, it's part of being a business, it's just Games Workshop don't seem to treat their customers like they probably should.
The Codices often aren't balanced, although you'll find that compared to each other, most of the 5th edition ones are. However, in may cases they are also horribly OTT (I'm looking at you Blood Angels and TWC) and the balance in power would be hard to achieve without regular updates etc.

Back on topic however, as Samus has touched upon, not every character should have eternal warrior. I'd much rather it didn't become the next Feel No Pain.
I also agree with many of his points about the Predator and Vindicator.
I think for now atleast the Codex is holding up well and no showing its age too much. This really really could change as more and more armies are updated, but I think it's doing well considering...

**stealth992**

Well I definitely agree that chaos is not the first codex that needs an update and I don't think this thread is about proving that chaos should be first in line. But if we just look at the csm codex objectively and put all other armies aside, we can still see that it is outdated. And the fact that the csm is outdated enough to make people like me whine, and it's not even close to being the worst codex, makes GW and the current state of balance in 40k look pretty bad. Just because there are worse codex's than the csm codex does not mean the csm codex is 'good'. Even if the csm codex was the best codex this does not mean that it necessarily must be good. Only good considering or relatively. What this implies is the quality of the 40k game as a whole.

Does the csm codex need an update? Yes.
Do a lot of codex's need an update? Yes.
Has GW lived up to your expectations? No.
Is the current state of the csm codex and the 40k metagame good enough to keep you playing? I've invested too much time, energy and money to quit 40k. For something that I've invested so much into, it sucks that I'm not really happy with GW.

**Gorskar.da.Lost**

stealth992 wrote:Nope not aware. Never seen SW nor BA in my life until this year. All I know is on warhammer.com when you look at the 40k 'armies' section, before this year there was no space wolves or blood angels. Now there is and they have a host of brand new units.

Perhaps then, you may wish to research a little deeper. Both the SW and the BA have had previous codexes, and these are truly ancient - indeed, they became so unusable that BA was replaced with a temporary PDF and SW was taken off the shelves completely.

Tell you what, I'll do your research for you. Here are the previous codex covers.

The Blood Angels, complete with Mark IV "Toilet-Neck" Terminator armour...

And the Space Wolves, featuring a very angry ginger man.

As you can see, I wasn't making it up.

**candy.man**

I forgot about the angry ginger dude. That codex cover used to always crack me up

**-Loki-**

If you want to go older:

2nd Edition Space Wolves, the very first Codex.

2nd Edition Angels of Death, including Blood Angels and Dark Angels.

**Melissia**

ArbitorIan wrote:Whereas YOUR perception is, of course, infallible.

Did I say that? No? Then you can stop right there and not continue that line of thought.

I would indeed claim I do have a better perception of the metagame than most people. Infallible? No. No human being is infallible. But given how many people go around whining about how everything that isn't their army list is overpowered/underpriced/broken/whatever, being better than the norm is hardly a high hurdle to jump.

Most people just suck.

**Samus_aran115**

Melissia wrote:
ArbitorIan wrote:Whereas YOUR perception is, of course, infallible.
Did I say that? No? Then you can stop right there and not continue that line of thought.

I would indeed claim I do have a better perception of the metagame than most people. Infallible? No. No human being is infallible. But given how many people go around whining about how everything that isn't their army list is overpowered/underpriced/broken/whatever, being better than the norm is hardly a high hurdle to jump.

Most people just suck.

Just..Stop.

This is a good thread that needs to stay around(If we want to prevent noobs from making new threads of course...).

I understand what you're saying though.

**Peter Wiggin**

The codex is still solid, and it really allows for alot of imagination with your modeling. Using fights as rules suits chaos very nicely IMO.

**BloodThirSTAR**

Wow Melissa that was so thoughtful. Color me not impressed.

**Sanctjud**

I'm guessing this thread has reached a natural end............

**Melissia**

BloodThirSTAR wrote:Wow Melissa that was so thoughtful. Color me not impressed.

I don't really particularly care...

The Sisters codex is far more out of date, lacking in variety, and internally unbalanced. We still use models from second edition for that matter. Yet I'm not making a whine thread about how the codex is broken, or weak, or whatnot-- instead I figure out how to win with what I have, while trying to match the army's lore with my army list.

The new CSM codex will come when it GW wants it to, and no amount of complaining on an internet forum will speed it along. Until then, you have one of the best codices out here at this moment, indeed, I would say it's tied with Eldar as the best non-fifth edition codex in fifth edition when it comes to both competitiveness AND variety. It's not perfectly internally or externally balanced, but there's only a couple really useless units- everything else has a place in a competitive army, if you're only willing to adapt.

**Samus_aran115**

Sanctjud wrote:I'm guessing this thread has reached a natural end............

My thoughts exactly....Seriously people....Why can't you just not pick fights with mellisia? You can't win. She always wins.

**Sanctjud**

I see we are now entering 'after party' territory... Samus is getting the party started with kissing Melissia's resin bottom.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
On a compeltely different note, I completely missed my reaching 6000 posts after 67 posts...dur...

**Manchu**

Back on topic with ye, me hearties.

**Samus_aran115**

Sanctjud wrote:I see we are now entering 'after party' territory... Samus is getting the party started with kissing Melissia's resin bottom.

Something like that.

Anyway. I keep thinking we need something like a venerable dreadnought. Let me explain.

Okay, so it's just a regular dreadnought, but you can pay XX points to make it lose the 'crazed' rule. In addition, the dreadnought gains +1 BS and +1 WS (Like a loyalist venerable).

Not only that, but I was thinking about dreadnought marks.

Khorne: The dreadnought gains attacks in every assault phase equal to a D6 roll (Not stackable, just roll once per turn)
Slaanesh: Units in assault with the dreadnought must make a leadership test with a -2 modifier. If they fail, the unit immediately goes to ground.
Nurgle: All armor values are increased by 1. In addition, all attacks made by the dreadnought count as poisoned and wound on a 3+
Tzeentch: The dreadnought becomes a psyker and may choose up to two psychic powers from the list. It may not choose powers that aren't tzeentch or undivided.
Undivided: The dreadnought gains +1 WS and may re-roll one attack per turn in the assault phase.

I guess all of these could work for defilers too, the more I think about it.

**Devilsquid**

I liked it back in Index Astartes when they had the Thousand Sons rules that if you took Demonic Possession on a Dreadnaught, it would lose the 'Crazed' rule to represent the fact that the Marine inside is dust.

IA were some great articles...

**Samus_aran115**

Devilsquid wrote:I liked it back in Index Astartes when they had the Thousand Sons rules that if you took Demonic Possession on a Dreadnaught, it would lose the 'Crazed' rule to represent the fact that the Marine inside is dust.

IA were some great articles...

Really? I own a 'copy' of index astartes....Never seen this. Do you a page number? I'm sorry

**Just Dave**

I personally dislike all the criticism of the Unstable Dreadnought Rule. Correct me if I'm wrong but it's been there for pretty much ever and it fits with the fluff and the random nature of Chaos.
Whilst it does loose competitiveness as a result, it's still flavoursome and further separates it from the SM dex.

I'd prefer it if there was a 1/6 chance of it not going crazy or potentially a venerable-esc rule stopping it from such, to add further variation etc. but I'd prefer such a rule to stay at its heart at-least.

I remember in my first ever game, my Chaos Dread went crazy and killed my Sorceror and Missile Launcher Tac. Dude, preventing me from taking down the Monolith and then doing nothing for the rest of the game and actually, I love it for such a thing. It was so bad, but so funny and memorable. I guess it's a different story for competitive players though...

**daedalus**

Guys, check out my AWESOME thought experiment!

Sorry if this has been talked about before, I don't come on the forums often. But I just tried searching for a similar topic and I couldn't really find anything. Anyways here are my thoughts. I have a tldr at the bottom for those of you that don't want to waste your time with my rant.

I feel like the IG Codex is outdated. Why? Pretty much all the independent characters have no real purpose other than to fulfill fluff. CCS is almost always a better choice than an independent character. I would have liked to see the independent characters affecting the army as whole like changing play style and such like the space marines have.

Enginseers and Penal Legion are useless. Elite well.. what IG player actually runs Elite competitively? Ratlings... an infiltrating squad that cannot hold a point? That's pretty much only ever used to wound an MC?

Fast Attack? VENDETTAS LOLZ HAHAHA WTFOMGOMGOMGLULZZZ111. Why would you even consider playing scout sentinels, armoured sentinels, hellhounds, or rough riders when vendettas are so 1337? Rough Riders because they are fluffy? Devil dog because you bought one before you knew how good Vendettas are? Rough Riders? I've never seen an Rough Rider in my life. Maybe it has its uses but Vendettas are still numbro uno. Armoured Sentinels? Nobody wants to run a Armoured Sentinel because everyone is complaining about how the Armoured Sentinel sucks compared to the sm dreadnought.

I'm not saying the codex sucks. What I'm saying is its unbalanced. There are some really great units in the codex and there are some really terrible units, and then there are mediocre units. The problem is that the really great units (ie. Vet squads and Vendettas) over shadow the rest of the codex's choices. The main thing I'll complain about is all the cool independent characters that are pretty much useless. Okay some are usable like Creed for instance but don't even get me started on Yarrick.

The codex did well with the vet troops in that you can have a sense of specialization or a solid scoring unit. But for those that want to run a catachan list or a Armageddon list, Harker and Yarrick are lolnoobs when compared to the vanilla CCS choices. Oh and I forgot about storm troopers. Great when used as a 5 man suiicide squad for 105 pts. But if you want to dedicate them to staying on the table, then you need to run a ten man squad to make the chimera's price worth it. And even then, that is a very expensive squad that is not fearless. Nobody really runs 10 man storm trooper squads, it's just not practical. What are you going to do? Deep strike them? That's like a 250+ price squad that comes in approximately turn 3-4 on average. And on the turn it comes in it can't move. So if they come in on turn three, they aren't assaulting anything until at least turn 4. These squads are only viable in massive games because in smaller games they just take up too much of your army pts and puts it off the table leaving your three chimeras to get pwned.

And Yarrick. The coolest looking independent character of all time. Badass of Armageddon. Yarrick who is the god of the Commissariat. His followers are known for being particularly resilient. Now check this out. Yarrick's save is 4+. Yep he gets instagibbed by powerfists. wow. And to make matters worse that's over 150 points for a model that gets instakilled and provides no bonuses to your army. LORD OF THE COMMISSARIAT HE IS SUPPOSED TO BE RESILIENT. A regular commissar lord has a 5+/5++. A priest with rosarius 4++. EVERYBODY AND THEIR MOTHER'S DOG HAS A 5++!!!!! He needs an invul save. period.

TLDR

Do you think the IG codex is outdated? Unbalanced? I think it does not allow for much variety. I play IG what should I buy. Vendetta and Infantry Squads, durr. Oh you like Steel Legion? Cool you could get Yarrick he's an independent character who was on Armageddon. Oh I forgot CCS are better. durr. What do you think of the IG codex?

Anyone know if they are going to make a new codex for IG? And if so when?

/thread

**JGrand**

TLDR

Do you think the IG codex is outdated? Unbalanced? I think it does not allow for much variety. I play IG what should I buy. Vendetta and Infantry Squads, durr. Oh you like Steel Legion? Cool you could get Yarrick he's an independent character who was on Armageddon. Oh I forgot CCS are better. durr. What do you think of the IG codex?

Anyone know if they are going to make a new codex for IG? And if so when?

I was talking to a friend just the other day about something that people seem to not get:

Just because something is "sub-optimal" or "less efficient" doesn't mean it is "unusable" or "uncompetitive".

Perhaps it's a WAAC mindset that really permeates most people. Maybe it's that people don't like to think for themselves. Or perhaps most are too lazy to make original lists and proxy units instead of ripping power lists of the internet. I don't know.

What I do know is that lots of the time units that are viable and sub optimal are still usable in a competitive environment. You can win with Berzerkers or Noise Marines. It's just that regular CSM and PM's do it better. Does that make them untakable? No. You can win with a Blood Angels commander. Sure, the Librarian is a better value, but does that in itself make the Commander "unusable"? No. I just can't take this kind of mindset seriously.

The reason that the CSM codex needs an update is because it is boring. Legions are gone. Cool weaponry and flavor is gone. I want fluff dammit! I should be restricted when playing a legion, but gain access to cool units and wargear as a reward. A Daemon Prince shouldn't be 25 more points than a Sorcerer who gains only one advantage (hiding in units/vehicle). Flavor is the number one gripe I have with the codex. The newer stuff is catching up to it, but it can still win.

The Guard examples prove nothing except the narrow minded view many gamers hold dear.

Bottom Line: Less efficient ≠Not Takable

**Melissia**

If people had a WAAC mindset they'd not give up so easily. No, they have a munchkin mindset.

**daedalus**

JGrand wrote:
Just because something is "sub-optimal" or "less efficient" doesn't mean it is "unusable" or "uncompetitive".

Yes, I don't think I could agree more. That's all I hear in the OP though. BTW, my friend plays with a Chaos Vindi. It works well for him.

The reason that the CSM codex needs an update is because it is boring. Legions are gone. Cool weaponry and flavor is gone. I want fluff dammit! I should be restricted when playing a legion, but gain access to cool units and wargear as a reward. A Daemon Prince shouldn't be 25 more points than a Sorcerer who gains only one advantage (hiding in units/vehicle). Flavor is the number one gripe I have with the codex. The newer stuff is catching up to it, but it can still win.

The Guard examples prove nothing except the narrow minded view many gamers hold dear.

Bottom Line: Less efficient ≠Not Takable

I completely agree with you. I've read through both, the old CSM and the 'new' CSM, and I agree that they've lost a lot. You ARE the bland marines now. The OP just seems to be whining about the fact that there is only one 'Timmy, Power Gamer' build.

Melissia wrote:
If people had a WAAC mindset they'd not give up so easily. No, they have a munchkin mindset.

But that's the wrong... eh, close enough.

**Gorskar.da.Lost**

-Loki- wrote:If you want to go older:

2nd Edition Space Wolves, the very first Codex.

2nd Edition Angels of Death, including Blood Angels and Dark Angels.

Good work. This, if nothing more, proves my point.
Anyway, back to the CSM. Again, there's a lack of fluff, but to be fair that's still not a big deal. Well, it might be if you're trying to play Legions, but whatever. Fact is a lot of that fluff is still around, and is also pretty damn easy to find. Maybe that doesn't suit everyone, but it's never caused me issues.

**Pacific**

I love that old SW cover! I believe its the same artist who did the cover for the old 'Chaos Renegades' cover, with the Khorne marine bestriding the fallen statue?

If you find the new Codex: CSM too limiting, I can't recommend enough the FW: Imperial Armour books enough. Book 5 features a standard renegades list (something not seen since the withdrawn Eye of Terror codex), 6 deals with Nurgle forces (marines with zombies!) and 7 with Khorne renegades. The books are wonderful, and I've heard some pretty good feedback from their level of balance (if anything, a little over-costed).

Certainly, for those who think the latest C:CSM has reduced Chaos somewhat ironically to the most boring and un-characterful army in the game, they are definitely something to consider.

**JGrand**

Yes, I don't think I could agree more. That's all I hear in the OP though. BTW, my friend plays with a Chaos Vindi. It works well for him.

I actually do too. At worst it's a nice distraction. It was fun to model as well.

I completely agree with you. I've read through both, the old CSM and the 'new' CSM, and I agree that they've lost a lot. You ARE the bland marines now. The OP just seems to be whining about the fact that there is only one 'Timmy, Power Gamer' build.

I think the blandness is first on the list of why it's bad. I do however, think that there is plenty that can be done better. I used the example of a BA Commander being underused compared to a Librarian. There are multiple reasons to take the Commander which can be weighted in accordingly. In the CSM codex there is almost no reason to roll with a Lord or Sorcerer. The only thing they do better is to hide in a squad, which would be fine if they didn't cost a mere 25 points less. The benefits of the DP are worth those few points 90% of the time.

There are also plenty of units that truly need some work. I'm not saying that Bikes, Possessed, and Chosen can never be taken or do well; what I am saying is that the point costs have become way out of line with other codices. The aren't horrible, but ultimately can be a liability more than a help unless the army is building around them. Both the Elite and Fast Attack sections are rather gimmicky. All of the stuff there is now done cheaper, better, more efficient, and more take-able in other codices. I think this is why people start to get a bit upset. Why do the CSM bikers pay 8 more points for an extra attack? Why are Raptors flavorless and more costly than Assault Marines? Why do the Predator and Vindicator cost 15 more points? Because the codex is outdated.

Again, this stuff can all be used. It's still viable, just suffering a bit from codex creep. It happens and other armies are much, much worse off in that regard.

Good work. This, if nothing more, proves my point.
Anyway, back to the CSM. Again, there's a lack of fluff, but to be fair that's still not a big deal. Well, it might be if you're trying to play Legions, but whatever. Fact is a lot of that fluff is still around, and is also pretty damn easy to find. Maybe that doesn't suit everyone, but it's never caused me issues.

I have always hated a HQ commanding differently marked troops. The basic troops of the CSM codex should be marines with access to marks (not icons) and lesser daemons (with access to marks). The Cult troops should be elites. The Mark of the HQ should unlock that particular cult troop as a troop choice. I just can't stand the lack of fluff in most lists. "Durr hurr this Slaneesh DP and his identical buddy lead these Plague Marines while employing the help of three full units of extremely rare Obliterators". ...shiver....

**stealth992**

JGrand wrote:
TLDR

Do you think the IG codex is outdated? Unbalanced? I think it does not allow for much variety. I play IG what should I buy. Vendetta and Infantry Squads, durr. Oh you like Steel Legion? Cool you could get Yarrick he's an independent character who was on Armageddon. Oh I forgot CCS are better. durr. What do you think of the IG codex?

Anyone know if they are going to make a new codex for IG? And if so when?

I was talking to a friend just the other day about something that people seem to not get:

Just because something is "sub-optimal" or "less efficient" doesn't mean it is "unusable" or "uncompetitive".

Perhaps it's a WAAC mindset that really permeates most people. Maybe it's that people don't like to think for themselves. Or perhaps most are too lazy to make original lists and proxy units instead of ripping power lists of the internet. I don't know.

What I do know is that lots of the time units that are viable and sub optimal are still usable in a competitive environment. You can win with Berzerkers or Noise Marines. It's just that regular CSM and PM's do it better. Does that make them untakable? No. You can win with a Blood Angels commander. Sure, the Librarian is a better value, but does that in itself make the Commander "unusable"? No. I just can't take this kind of mindset seriously.

On the note of 'mediocre units being unusable in light of better units'. Firstly, I'll have you note I do not use daemon princes or obliterators. So if I believed mediocre units are unusable why would I be using them? I am by no means a power gamer. But logically speaking, if you had the choice to pick up your new girlfriend in a ferrari or a ford escort, which ones it gonna be? That's just logic. What I would have liked to see for instance are not units that are so good that they completely dominate their section, but a variety of units in a section that have their own 'niche' in the game. When I run my defilers, I hate having the feeling that I would be in a better situation right now if I had brought obliterators. Especially when my defiler gets pwned second turn. And when my 275 point abaddon rolls a 1 and wounds himself I can't help but think I'd be a lot better off if I brought a daemon prince for half the price. How do you not understand what I'm talking about? This is not a WAACs mentality, this is just logic. Although to be fair, I exaggerate a lot when I rant for dramatic effect and to get people riled up so they'll get involved with the thread.

Although, your bottom line being that less efficient does not equal not take-able I agree with.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

JGrand wrote:

I have always hated a HQ commanding differently marked troops. The basic troops of the CSM codex should be marines with access to marks (not icons) and lesser daemons (with access to marks). The Cult troops should be elites. The Mark of the HQ should unlock that particular cult troop as a troop choice. I just can't stand the lack of fluff in most lists. "Durr hurr this Slaneesh DP and his identical buddy lead these Plague Marines while employing the help of three full units of extremely rare Obliterators". ...shiver....

I lol'd well said mate.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

JGrand wrote:

I have always hated a HQ commanding differently marked troops. The basic troops of the CSM codex should be marines with access to marks (not icons) and lesser daemons (with access to marks). The Cult troops should be elites. The Mark of the HQ should unlock that particular cult troop as a troop choice. I just can't stand the lack of fluff in most lists. "Durr hurr this Slaneesh DP and his identical buddy lead these Plague Marines while employing the help of three full units of extremely rare Obliterators". ...shiver....

I lol'd. Well said.