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.

carbonpillow wrote:

labmouse42 wrote:

CSM is an older codex and is suffering from codex creep. As a codex gets older, the number of viable builds drops, until a codex is left with very few -- such as Eldar, Tau, or Necrons. The fact is a BA or SW player has multiple competitive builds they can base their army off of, and they all work. An Eldar player has 1 competitive build and 1 semi-competitive build. (I use Eldar as an example as I play the army) The CSM codex appears to be in a similar place.

This.

Except it isn't really true. Old books like BT still have viable builds in them, heck DE still could win in the hands of a vet with its good build (singular, DE were a short book not fleshed out much), and SoB has solid if not super lists left in it before the WD nerf. DA can make a mean list now that GW decided to allow them to have modern weapons (still a bad book, but they do have a good mono build) Chaos got screwed on their new book, it was always bad from day one, the game has progressed enough to show it was bad. Eldar also were a bad copy pasta army that really wasn't any good from day one (any book that just nerfs and copies points from a previous book is going to be bad). Necrons were a gimmick army with no variety, its no wonder they suck after they changed the rule set to no longer favor that gimmick (in this case, always being able to glance with any weapon got nerfed by 5th ed).

My point? the books that people point to as being killed by codex creep were always bad. They got really screwed by new addition due to lack of options. Even orks with their almost reasonable number of options faired better than the awful CSM, necrons, and the almost bad eldar and tau (eldar and tau still have builds you can win against good armies with).

The only thing that keeps chaos afloat is that they have solid troop choices. Limited to be sure but as troops are the necessity of 5th edition that is the only hat they have to hang their hat on. Necrons and Tau really die on the fact they have crappy troop choices. Tau battlesuits and necron destroyers are still good but you are auto-gimped because your troop choices are a liability.

I feel your pain brother. As an Eldar player I am kinda in the same situation as you are. Hell, Eldar troops are upgrades for Wave Serpent, not the other way around In my instance however I kinda cut myself out of gaming community and play only with some close friends. We have Eldar (me), CSM, SW/GK, Tau and IG in the neighbourhood. Fortunately we like to play goofy and not optimized armies so the codex differences are not that important.
Dakka is the only place where I meet outside gaming world. One of the reasons is that I stopped playing in game stores was the difference of army strength. Well, not even that. More like it was the incredible difference between mentality of MEQ and xeno codexes. I may have been unlucky and this will sound very stereotypical but IoM armies were most of the time spammy, boring, internet copy-paste armies. There were butt-load of them and players playing them were gloating how great their army is. If I saw an xenos army I often really felt like the player was really into the hobby. There was also gloating and stuff but it was: "Waaaaaagh! Orks are the best, they will crush your pansy elfs", not "My terminators are 2+/3++. Pfff T3 4+".
Ok, all that I wanted to say (apparently) is that you are doing something wrong. I really know how you feel because I also was really tired of wh40k. However this hobby (like any other) should be about having fun and taking your mind off things, not giving you additional worries. You have to change something: your attitude, your army, people that you play or even change the hobby. I don't know what, but this is pointless dude. I know how stupid and over-used this sounds but the right attitude is a incredible thing. You won't have fun now. In your head you are a looser before a game even started. Stop this nonsense an start having fun right now!

CSM are still good, they only have one build that actually works against a wide variety of opponents. They are more cookie cutter than bad.

Dual lash sorcerer, Oblits, PMs can and do still win tournaments.

Are they top tier? Not really. But not the worst by any means, IMO.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Macock
Eldar are still viable as well! Haha, I feel like a broken record in this thread. I win games and tournaments with my Eldar regularly and they still do well in tournaments, although they are certainly underrepresented these days.

I totally agree with you though, that you choose to have fun with this game, and your attitude is what matters. Having the right mindset is what makes the game (and anything, really) fun.

Yeah, I'm not saying they are not, but constant listening to how bad and overshadowed they are in 5th edition make them feel worse than they really are. That is the problem. The constant and unstoppable "codex creep", "older codexes", "not viable", "worse" creates this huuuuge gap, make you feel helpless and loose the joy/will to play. Before you try to find something good in your army you have to stop listening to the internets about how bad your army is.
Grow some chaos-balls and start feeling hate towards corpse emperor. Chaos should not envy IoM, it should feel sorry and despise it.

Haha, well said! The internet is a resource, not the gospel. Your own experience as a player is more important than what some pundit on the internet proclaims (not talking about the op, just in general).

Play what works for you and have the balls to stand behind your own results. It is souch cooler to win with a list you create than with a list you copy.

notabot187 wrote:Eldar also were a bad copy pasta army that really wasn't any good from day one (any book that just nerfs and copies points from a previous book is going to be bad).

Skimmers moving fast told me to say "what?", so I'm going to. What?

notabot187 wrote:Eldar also were a bad copy pasta army that really wasn't any good from day one (any book that just nerfs and copies points from a previous book is going to be bad).

I don't think you're remembering your history right. 4th edition eldar with Tri-Falcons and harlequins + snakes on a plane was really good in 4th.

Macok wrote:...constant listening to how bad and overshadowed they are in 5th edition make them feel worse than they really are. That is the problem. The constant and unstoppable "codex creep", "older codexes", "not viable", "worse" creates this huuuuge gap, make you feel helpless and loose the joy/will to play. Before you try to find something good in your army you have to stop listening to the internets about how bad your army is.
Grow some chaos-balls and start feeling hate towards corpse emperor. Chaos should not envy IoM, it should feel sorry and despise it.

Reecius wrote:Haha, well said! The internet is a resource, not the gospel. Your own experience as a player is more important than what some pundit on the internet proclaims (not talking about the op, just in general).

Play what works for you and have the balls to stand behind your own results. It is souch cooler to win with a list you create than with a list you copy.

This is really the key right here. And for the record, as several posters have said, Chaos has several viable builds that still work really well, and Chaos has some rocking Special Characters as well! One thing that I do when I'm feeling down about the lack of choices in my Codex, is running Abaddon and Typhus in a Land Raider together. It makes for a hella awesome game.

Reecius wrote:CSM are still good, they only have one build that actually works against a wide variety of opponents. They are more cookie cutter than bad.

Dual lash sorcerer, Oblits, PMs can and do still win tournaments.

Are they top tier? Not really. But not the worst by any means, IMO.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Macock
Eldar are still viable as well! Haha, I feel like a broken record in this thread. I win games and tournaments with my Eldar regularly and they still do well in tournaments, although they are certainly underrepresented these days.

I totally agree with you though, that you choose to have fun with this game, and your attitude is what matters. Having the right mindset is what makes the game (and anything, really) fun.

Dual lash Princes plus 6 walkers...

Yeah, whitedragon runs the monster mash list with 6 walkers and 3 monstrous creatures and he beat me with it. That is a cool, fun army.

Chaos Space Marines are the "bad guys" of the 40k universe. As far as I can tell, they are the only non Daemon characters that do what they do because they want to, not because Slaanesh will eat their souls if they don't; not because they were tricked into following some near deity in avatar form to slaughter millions blindly; not because they are too primitive a species to understand how to spell the word "boys" correctly.

CSM are Chaotic because they get a thrill from it. This makes them the bad guys.

And the bad guy isn't suppose to win...

zechariahsword wrote:Chaos Space Marines are the "bad guys" of the 40k universe. As far as I can tell, they are the only non Daemon characters that do what they do because they want to, not because Slaanesh will eat their souls if they don't; not because they were tricked into following some near deity in avatar form to slaughter millions blindly; not because they are too primitive a species to understand how to spell the word "boys" correctly.

CSM are Chaotic because they get a thrill from it. This makes them the bad guys.

And the bad guy isn't suppose to win...

I agree with everything but the last statement.

In 40K, the Bad guys can and do win, it is a big part of the reason why the setting is so engaging. The bad guys are winning the war, the "good guys" if you can call anyone in 40K good, are losing, slowly.

Chaos Marines are free. They choose to fight because they think Chaos is the path to human domination of the galaxy. The Imperium is trying to do the same thing, they just follow the emperor instead. The Imperium is just as brutal and callous as Chaos.

However, fluff and the game are separate things. No one would want to buy and paint an army that was designed to lose. Therefore, all the armies should be as close to equal with one another as possible. The Bad Guys should be intimidating and scary, otherwise they aren't much of a threat. And, in game terms, they need to be able to win a game.

Chaos armies, IMO, should have individually more powerful models. Chaos warriors are all about personal glory and power. Imperial Marines are about team work and loyalty and as such, should be more about synergy between units. A Choas lord should be a total bad ass that wrecks face. An Imperial Marine Captain should also be tough in combat, but should be more geared towards benefiting his comrades and working as a team.

Chaos marines forsake the emperor for philosophical reasons, but embrace Chaos to increase in personal power. Therefore, they should be more powerful than regular marines (and they are).

Looking at it from a story or fluff perspective and saying the baddies should lose, the good guys should win, is too black and white and would make for a crappy game in real life. The setting should be more complex (which it is) and the armies should be equal in power.

uhmmm

first off as a chaos space marine player who has played for about two years now i would have to disagree.

chaos is a perfectly playable army.

while they may not live up to the fluff they do have alot of power and potential if played right. that may require using the cults alot. plauge noise thousand sons and bezerkers. but they are far from underpowered.

heck their basic guy gets tywo close combat weapons a bolter and krac plus frag grenades all for 15 points a model.

i would also like to remind you that 40k is a game that is not won by the individual model or creature but by doing the right thing at the right time in the right way.

chaos are playable but what you are asking for is that each of them essentially become evil grey knights.

this could be fun except you forget something, just because chaos marines strive for personal glory doenst mean they get it. if you read the codex it even says that many a champion of chaos has been turned into a spawn!
just because they choose to follow chaos for personal glory and fame etc does not mean they get it

and finally as for your statement
"A Choas lord should be a total bad ass that wrecks face"

try taking on a lord of slaanesh with a blissgiver and come back to me., cause i have had him single handily take out a unit of terminators with storm shields. so yeah he wreaks face.

also there is a khorn lord who can single handedly take out a mob of 15 ork boys if he rolls well.

chaos are a viable army you just got to play them right.

so any questions?

Reecius wrote:

zechariahsword wrote:Chaos Space Marines are the "bad guys" of the 40k universe. As far as I can tell, they are the only non Daemon characters that do what they do because they want to, not because Slaanesh will eat their souls if they don't; not because they were tricked into following some near deity in avatar form to slaughter millions blindly; not because they are too primitive a species to understand how to spell the word "boys" correctly.

CSM are Chaotic because they get a thrill from it. This makes them the bad guys.

And the bad guy isn't suppose to win...

I agree with everything but the last statement.

In 40K, the Bad guys can and do win, it is a big part of the reason why the setting is so engaging. The bad guys are winning the war, the "good guys" if you can call anyone in 40K good, are losing, slowly.

Chaos Marines are free. They choose to fight because they think Chaos is the path to human domination of the galaxy. The Imperium is trying to do the same thing, they just follow the emperor instead. The Imperium is just as brutal and callous as Chaos.

However, fluff and the game are separate things. No one would want to buy and paint an army that was designed to lose. Therefore, all the armies should be as close to equal with one another as possible. The Bad Guys should be intimidating and scary, otherwise they aren't much of a threat. And, in game terms, they need to be able to win a game.

Chaos armies, IMO, should have individually more powerful models. Chaos warriors are all about personal glory and power. Imperial Marines are about team work and loyalty and as such, should be more about synergy between units. A Choas lord should be a total bad ass that wrecks face. An Imperial Marine Captain should also be tough in combat, but should be more geared towards benefiting his comrades and working as a team.

Chaos marines forsake the emperor for philosophical reasons, but embrace Chaos to increase in personal power. Therefore, they should be more powerful than regular marines (and they are).

Looking at it from a story or fluff perspective and saying the baddies should lose, the good guys should win, is too black and white and would make for a crappy game in real life. The setting should be more complex (which it is) and the armies should be equal in power.

If they weren't designed to lose, why is EVERY battle an uphill one for them (unless you are fighting Tau Kroot spam... then it's equal footing). I haven't played a game with every solid list I've made that didn't feel like it was a painful struggle when I wanted to win. So I've decided to just go ahead and give in and be a road bump instead of the major threat that we once was.

I'm not saying they aren't playable, nor that they cannot win. I'm saying that we should accept what we have at the moment, even if it is simply the role of bad guy who must inevitably fall for the good guys to get the girls.

zechariahsword wrote:If they weren't designed to lose, why is EVERY battle an uphill one for them (unless you are fighting Tau Kroot spam... then it's equal footing). I haven't played a game with every solid list I've made that didn't feel like it was a painful struggle when I wanted to win. So I've decided to just go ahead and give in and be a road bump instead of the major threat that we once was.

I'm not saying they aren't playable, nor that they cannot win. I'm saying that we should accept what we have at the moment, even if it is simply the role of bad guy who must inevitably fall for the good guys to get the girls.

What kind of crack are you smoking? This isn't a movie, its a game mate. Do you really think GW are going to purposely gimp ALL the bad guys and make the good guys tougher? If you can't win with your CSM, or its a painful struggle to win, either your playing way out of your league or you are just plain bad mate. Part of 40k is that the good guys ARE BAD GUYS. You think planetary cleansing is "good"? The barbaric nature of marines is "good"? The sheer scale of human life thrown away in the Imperial guard to be "good"? The arrogance of the Eldar and their manipulation of others "good"?

Every battle except Tau Kroot spam is uphill? What kind of lists do you make?!? Are you playing in non-stop hyper competitive tournaments, or are you seriously just terribad? I doubt you are playing competitive, as someone who is happy to be a "road bump" wouldn't have what I call a competitive spirit. Seriously, post up an average list of yours, so we can judge you on your status as a "road bump"- whether its the problem with the tools in the box or the tradesman using it.

marmaduke wrote:and finally as for your statement
"A Choas lord should be a total bad ass that wrecks face"

try taking on a lord of slaanesh with a blissgiver and come back to me., cause i have had him single handily take out a unit of terminators with storm shields. so yeah he wreaks face.

also there is a khorn lord who can single handedly take out a mob of 15 ork boys if he rolls well.

chaos are a viable army you just got to play them right.

so any questions?

You got lucky with the terminators. Average DW roll of 4 coupled with the Lord's 3 attacks + 1 for charging (assuming hedid) is 8 attacks, hitting on 3s for 5.3 hits, wounding on 4s for 2.65 wounds, with the Terminators saving on 3+ for 0.88245 dead terminators, or, 1. Terminators then strike back with 8 attacks, 4 hits, 3.332 wounds and 2.222444 dead Chaos Lords. Try it some more and get back to us.

Khorne Lords can take out squads if they roll well, the key word being 'if'. My Bloodfeeder Lord has done some great things, but the vast majority of other people's have not, compared to the much less random Twin LC Khorne Lord. Taking out the 15 boys would also require you to roll 12 for your DW attacks, hit with every attack and wound with every attack; hitting on 3s and wounding on 4s means that, on average, 12 attacks get 8 hits and 4 wounds.

As a Chaos Player for 4 years, you cannot use lucky rolls to determine how useful an army is, otherwise i'd be declaring Tau to be the best CC army in the game.

Anybody that honestly believes csm were designed to lose has not been playing the game very long. If csm were designed to lose why was the codex so insanely overpowered at the time of its release? Whythen was csm argueably the most powerful codex ever released in 4th ed?

schadenfreude wrote:Anybody that honestly believes csm were designed to lose has not been playing the game very long. If csm were designed to lose why was the codex so insanely overpowered at the time of its release? Whythen was csm argueably the most powerful codex ever released in 4th ed?

It wasn't. People flipped out about it, as is normal for new codex releases. I'm not saying that GW designed them to lose, as that's a silly argument, but your position is not that strong either.

You got lucky with the terminators. Average DW roll of 4 coupled with the Lord's 3 attacks + 1 for charging (assuming hedid) is 8 attacks, hitting on 3s for 5.3 hits, wounding on 4s for 2.65 wounds, with the Terminators saving on 3+ for 0.88245 dead terminators, or, 1. Terminators then strike back with 8 attacks, 4 hits, 3.332 wounds and 2.222444 dead Chaos Lords. Try it some more and get back to us.

Khorne Lords can take out squads if they roll well, the key word being 'if'. My Bloodfeeder Lord has done some great things, but the vast majority of other people's have not, compared to the much less random Twin LC Khorne Lord. Taking out the 15 boys would also require you to roll 12 for your DW attacks, hit with every attack and wound with every attack; hitting on 3s and wounding on 4s means that, on average, 12 attacks get 8 hits and 4 wounds.

As a Chaos Player for 4 years, you cannot use lucky rolls to determine how useful an army is, otherwise i'd be declaring Tau to be the best CC army in the game.


i agree that it is luck on the part of the terminators but how many hqs can go up or take out an entire squad of effectivly instant death another hq.

and i was also using that as an example that a chaos lord can wreck face

and dont joke about tau

as for choas i still dont see how they are not a valid army

One time I saw a Crisis suit commander assault a terminator squad, kill two of them, and then they whiffed entirely. They broke from combat and ran off the table. Still doesn't make Tau commanders good in close combat.

the point i am trying to get across is they are basically the only army that can get up to 15 attacks from a lord

so can we move past the luck part

marmaduke wrote:the point i am trying to get across is they are basically the only army that can get up to 15 attacks from a lord

so can we move past the luck part

But those 15 attacks are statistically less likely to actually kill stuff, especially when you factor in that the chance to make 0 attacks is *much higher* than the chance to get 15 attacks, than other HQ options.

willydstyle wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:Anybody that honestly believes csm were designed to lose has not been playing the game very long. If csm were designed to lose why was the codex so insanely overpowered at the time of its release? Whythen was csm argueably the most powerful codex ever released in 4th ed?

It wasn't. People flipped out about it, as is normal for new codex releases. I'm not saying that GW designed them to lose, as that's a silly argument, but your position is not that strong either.

Agreed, the Eldar Codex was far stronger, what with those stupid Harlequins and flying circus.

willydstyle wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:Anybody that honestly believes csm were designed to lose has not been playing the game very long. If csm were designed to lose why was the codex so insanely overpowered at the time of its release? Whythen was csm argueably the most powerful codex ever released in 4th ed?

It wasn't. People flipped out about it, as is normal for new codex releases. I'm not saying that GW designed them to lose, as that's a silly argument, but your position is not that strong either.

You're not saying CSM are were to lose, but other people here have said that exact statement.

I stand by my previous statement that CSM was overpowered when it was first released, and that 4th ed CSM was a giant leap forward in the concept of the codex creep. In September 2007 CSM was the most powerful codex released up to that point in time. What were the top tier armies in September 2007, and where was chaos in the pecking order? The only other 4th ed books out at the time were Eldar, DE, Tau, and BT. Everybody else was 3rd ed, and armies were not heavily mechanized yet.

schadenfreude wrote:

willydstyle wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:Anybody that honestly believes csm were designed to lose has not been playing the game very long. If csm were designed to lose why was the codex so insanely overpowered at the time of its release? Whythen was csm argueably the most powerful codex ever released in 4th ed?

It wasn't. People flipped out about it, as is normal for new codex releases. I'm not saying that GW designed them to lose, as that's a silly argument, but your position is not that strong either.

You're not saying CSM are were to lose, but other people here have said that exact statement.

I stand by my previous statement that CSM was overpowered when it was first released, and that 4th ed CSM was a giant leap forward in the concept of the codex creep. In September 2007 CSM was the most powerful codex released up to that point in time. What were the top tier armies in September 2007, and where was chaos in the pecking order? The only other 4th ed books out at the time were Eldar, DE, Tau, and BT. Everybody else was 3rd ed, and armies were not heavily mechanized yet.

Nidzilla, Mechdar, Mech Tau (Both extremely powerful due to LoS rules and Skimmers Moving Fast), MSU Space Marine gunline were all powerful builds, better than "plague lash oblits", and all came from 4th ed books that were released *before* Chaos Space Marines. DE was *never* a 4th ed book.

schadenfreude wrote:

willydstyle wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:Anybody that honestly believes csm were designed to lose has not been playing the game very long. If csm were designed to lose why was the codex so insanely overpowered at the time of its release? Whythen was csm argueably the most powerful codex ever released in 4th ed?

It wasn't. People flipped out about it, as is normal for new codex releases. I'm not saying that GW designed them to lose, as that's a silly argument, but your position is not that strong either.

You're not saying CSM are were to lose, but other people here have said that exact statement.

I stand by my previous statement that CSM was overpowered when it was first released, and that 4th ed CSM was a giant leap forward in the concept of the codex creep. In September 2007 CSM was the most powerful codex released up to that point in time. What were the top tier armies in September 2007, and where was chaos in the pecking order? The only other 4th ed books out at the time were Eldar, DE, Tau, and BT. Everybody else was 3rd ed, and armies were not heavily mechanized yet.

DE certainly didnt get a 4th ed book...
If memory served, nids and SM was also at 4th ed at that point.

Double Lash/Nurgle/Obliterators had it's good days, but against mech Tau and Mech Eldar it would have a hard time.

Jihallah wrote:

zechariahsword wrote:If they weren't designed to lose, why is EVERY battle an uphill one for them (unless you are fighting Tau Kroot spam... then it's equal footing). I haven't played a game with every solid list I've made that didn't feel like it was a painful struggle when I wanted to win. So I've decided to just go ahead and give in and be a road bump instead of the major threat that we once was.

I'm not saying they aren't playable, nor that they cannot win. I'm saying that we should accept what we have at the moment, even if it is simply the role of bad guy who must inevitably fall for the good guys to get the girls.

What kind of crack are you smoking? This isn't a movie, its a game mate. Do you really think GW are going to purposely gimp ALL the bad guys and make the good guys tougher? If you can't win with your CSM, or its a painful struggle to win, either your playing way out of your league or you are just plain bad mate. Part of 40k is that the good guys ARE BAD GUYS. You think planetary cleansing is "good"? The barbaric nature of marines is "good"? The sheer scale of human life thrown away in the Imperial guard to be "good"? The arrogance of the Eldar and their manipulation of others "good"?

Every battle except Tau Kroot spam is uphill? What kind of lists do you make?!? Are you playing in non-stop hyper competitive tournaments, or are you seriously just terribad? I doubt you are playing competitive, as someone who is happy to be a "road bump" wouldn't have what I call a competitive spirit. Seriously, post up an average list of yours, so we can judge you on your status as a "road bump"- whether its the problem with the tools in the box or the tradesman using it.

Lol. Not saying you are a flaming troll Jihallah, just saying you sound like one in that post.

My lists have always been either close or exactly the "meta" of Chaos Marines. I always try to add a little spice and variety to them for entertainment and individuality's sake, but most every list usually involves either Dual Princes of either Nurgle/Lash flavor, or Sorc with Lash, Plague Marines, Oblits, and other things that are suppose to be decent such as Zerkers, CSM standard, and occassionally a termicide or two. I like to try to use Slaanesh themed stuff besides a DP like Lords/Raptors and even considered trying out Noise Marines, but eventually it all gets phased out due to uselessness.

The only army I have not lost to was a low points Imperial Guard, and it was BECAUSE of my tactics that won me the game, not in spite of it (the game was objective based, and I succeeded in morale shoving one of his troops off the field with my termicide unit, and contesting another objective with the same termie unit, then held an objective building on the final turn). That's not to say that if it wasn't only objectives for the victory I wouldn't have lost... he outgunned me so heavily that I only had two units left on the field by the final round... he had only lost one troop, one Chimera, and an elite unit that I cannot recall their name.

Every other army I've played is always the same game: I'm outgunned (including CC), or out manned. It's like a slap in the face when my opponent can field a unit of 6 Wraiths that do 1 trillion CC attacks at I6 and my Zerkers in the same game can only do 30+/- one I lower... which of course means I have no Zerkers left even if I charge... Don't tell me I just needed to shoot them either! I was pumping every Plasma gun/Lascannon/Multimelta/Meltagun my 8 Oblits and 2 units of Plague marines could muster at them and the Necron lord traveling with them... they just would not die. I could've been rolling low, and he could've been rolling high, which was the case, but regardless it's still a heavy insult to have him carving through my so-called "tough" units.
Tau is the same game, only with more shooting instead of CC... I have never succeeded in taking down a Tau army regardless of how focused I am in my targeting.
There are more and more examples but I think at this point you get it (or not, you may just say I'm terribad regardless).

My point is: regardless of how well or badly I play my units, I have always been outgunned with the "solid" lists of CSM. And usually, whoever gets to shoot/attack more get's a higher chance of good rolls.

As far as my "competitive spirit" is concerned... If I was playing this game to be competitive and not for fun... I'd play SW/BA/GK/IG/DE. But, I enjoy playing the end all be all bad guys, regardless of how "terribad" they are.

I think I should make it clear that even though I've lost the majority of my games, I still enjoy playing them.

zechariahsword wrote:

Jihallah wrote:

zechariahsword wrote:If they weren't designed to lose, why is EVERY battle an uphill one for them (unless you are fighting Tau Kroot spam... then it's equal footing). I haven't played a game with every solid list I've made that didn't feel like it was a painful struggle when I wanted to win. So I've decided to just go ahead and give in and be a road bump instead of the major threat that we once was.

I'm not saying they aren't playable, nor that they cannot win. I'm saying that we should accept what we have at the moment, even if it is simply the role of bad guy who must inevitably fall for the good guys to get the girls.

What kind of crack are you smoking? This isn't a movie, its a game mate. Do you really think GW are going to purposely gimp ALL the bad guys and make the good guys tougher? If you can't win with your CSM, or its a painful struggle to win, either your playing way out of your league or you are just plain bad mate. Part of 40k is that the good guys ARE BAD GUYS. You think planetary cleansing is "good"? The barbaric nature of marines is "good"? The sheer scale of human life thrown away in the Imperial guard to be "good"? The arrogance of the Eldar and their manipulation of others "good"?

Every battle except Tau Kroot spam is uphill? What kind of lists do you make?!? Are you playing in non-stop hyper competitive tournaments, or are you seriously just terribad? I doubt you are playing competitive, as someone who is happy to be a "road bump" wouldn't have what I call a competitive spirit. Seriously, post up an average list of yours, so we can judge you on your status as a "road bump"- whether its the problem with the tools in the box or the tradesman using it.

Lol. Not saying you are a flaming troll Jihallah, just saying you sound like one in that post.

My lists have always been either close or exactly the "meta" of Chaos Marines. I always try to add a little spice and variety to them for entertainment and individuality's sake, but most every list usually involves either Dual Princes of either Nurgle/Lash flavor, or Sorc with Lash, Plague Marines, Oblits, and other things that are suppose to be decent such as Zerkers, CSM standard, and occassionally a termicide or two. I like to try to use Slaanesh themed stuff besides a DP like Lords/Raptors and even considered trying out Noise Marines, but eventually it all gets phased out due to uselessness.

The only army I have not lost to was a low points Imperial Guard, and it was BECAUSE of my tactics that won me the game, not in spite of it (the game was objective based, and I succeeded in morale shoving one of his troops off the field with my termicide unit, and contesting another objective with the same termie unit, then held an objective building on the final turn). That's not to say that if it wasn't only objectives for the victory I wouldn't have lost... he outgunned me so heavily that I only had two units left on the field by the final round... he had only lost one troop, one Chimera, and an elite unit that I cannot recall their name.

Every other army I've played is always the same game: I'm outgunned (including CC), or out manned. It's like a slap in the face when my opponent can field a unit of 6 Wraiths that do 1 trillion CC attacks at I6 and my Zerkers in the same game can only do 30+/- one I lower... which of course means I have no Zerkers left even if I charge... Don't tell me I just needed to shoot them either! I was pumping every Plasma gun/Lascannon/Multimelta/Meltagun my 8 Oblits and 2 units of Plague marines could muster at them and the Necron lord traveling with them... they just would not die. I could've been rolling low, and he could've been rolling high, which was the case, but regardless it's still a heavy insult to have him carving through my so-called "tough" units.
Tau is the same game, only with more shooting instead of CC... I have never succeeded in taking down a Tau army regardless of how focused I am in my targeting.
There are more and more examples but I think at this point you get it (or not, you may just say I'm terribad regardless).

My point is: regardless of how well or badly I play my units, I have always been outgunned with the "solid" lists of CSM. And usually, whoever gets to shoot/attack more get's a higher chance of good rolls.

As far as my "competitive spirit" is concerned... If I was playing this game to be competitive and not for fun... I'd play SW/BA/GK/IG/DE. But, I enjoy playing the end all be all bad guys, regardless of how "terribad" they are.

I think I should make it clear that even though I've lost the majority of my games, I still enjoy playing them.

I play a list with emporer's children and either two lash princes or two lash sorcerers. While not as overpowering due to the penchant for SM /SW to play a librarian and mess all over my lashes, I have still won with it quite consistently. I do not think that CSM is hopeless but it is underpowered/overpriced. I do agree that at 1850 I am probably short almost a squad of marines versus my loyalist counterpart (or a spare landspeeder or two for the SM).

However - as we do not have a number of GK players - I have not faced them yet so I can't answer to that nor DE as I am the lone DE player in our area. Against SW, SM and the like, CSM still have just enough tricks up their sleeve to make life painful for an opponent.

(Doesn't mean I don't long for the days of Autocannon/Blastmaster equivalence or slaanesh drug packs or the like.)

I think you can still do a solid themed CSM list with all your troop choices but the value of your elites, heavies and fast attack choices is weak either due to cost or effectiveness or both.

My biggest rant on chaos is landraiders not having a machine spirit. It makes raiders into immobile pillboxes or fast assault vehicles. There is no value to moving 6" as you pay for both those TL las cannons and TL heavybolter and if you move 6" you only get to fire 1 weapon system. I will gladly give up my discount of 30 or so points for some form of machine spirit.

Reecius wrote:In 40K, the Bad guys can and do win, it is a big part of the reason why the setting is so engaging. The bad guys are winning the war, the "good guys" if you can call anyone in 40K good, are losing, slowly.

This is breaking off into fluff vs game, but one of the cool things is what Reecius touched on.

You cannot call the imperium 'good' when it will slaughter billions of people to prevent a risk of infection. You cannot call a system that sacrifices hundreds of psykers every day to the soul of the emperor 'good'.

There are no real 'good guys' in Warhammer. There are just factions with their own self-motivated interests.

DAaddict wrote:
My biggest rant on chaos is landraiders not having a machine spirit. It makes raiders into immobile pillboxes or fast assault vehicles. There is no value to moving 6" as you pay for both those TL las cannons and TL heavybolter and if you move 6" you only get to fire 1 weapon system. I will gladly give up my discount of 30 or so points for some form of machine spirit.

Actually....

1) Remove Dreadnought "Crazed" rule.
2) Make Icons count as full fledged Marks, (ie, not losing it when you lose the Icon)
3) Remove Demon Weapons rebelling on a 1.
4) Add "Infernal Spirit" back to Land Raiders at +30 points.

These changes would make the Chaos book a whole new ball game all by themselves.