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.

Nurgle bikers are very hardy. Yes, while vulnerable to lasguns, they aren't very likely to cause lots of casualties, and even boltguns need 6's, while weapons like Autocannons will on average require as many shots to kill a Nurgle Biker as they will to kill an AV11 tank. The resiliency coupled with the speed (and a cost that's still 7ppm lower than the *basic* biker used to be) makes them very scary, it's very hard to stop them before they get where they want to go.

There were a number of things I was disappointed in, but one of the items that I liked was the way it "mimics" Chaos Fantasy with the challanges. I mentioned this in one discussion and experienced some ranting. He argued he didn't like the randomness, which I can understand, but another reason was he said "its hard to pull off".

Am I missing something? All the champion of chaos has to do is win a challenge. If you charge, your in a challenge, because you have to challenge. Chaos Marines are still marines and fairly decent, especially when you start gearing them up, like you can again. I didn't get this argument.

Anyone have any insight on this argument? My feelings are you can gear some chaos units (and leaders) towards close combat and pull this off 1-2 a game. Im I off in this assumption?

Phydox wrote:
There were a number of things I was disappointed in, but one of the items that I liked was the way it "mimics" Chaos Fantasy with the challanges. I mentioned this in one discussion and experienced some ranting. He argued he didn't like the randomness, which I can understand, but another reason was he said "its hard to pull off".

Am I missing something? All the champion of chaos has to do is win a challenge. If you charge, your in a challenge, because you have to challenge. Chaos Marines are still marines and fairly decent, especially when you start gearing them up, like you can again. I didn't get this argument.

Anyone have any insight on this argument? My feelings are you can gear some chaos units (and leaders) towards close combat and pull this off 1-2 a game. Im I off in this assumption?

For a small tax, you can also have each of your characters begin the game with a roll on the chart...

But then, this is DakkaDakka, where the sky must always be falling and GW sucks at everything.

Phydox wrote:
There were a number of things I was disappointed in, but one of the items that I liked was the way it "mimics" Chaos Fantasy with the challanges. I mentioned this in one discussion and experienced some ranting. He argued he didn't like the randomness, which I can understand, but another reason was he said "its hard to pull off".

Am I missing something? All the champion of chaos has to do is win a challenge. If you charge, your in a challenge, because you have to challenge. Chaos Marines are still marines and fairly decent, especially when you start gearing them up, like you can again. I didn't get this argument.

Anyone have any insight on this argument? My feelings are you can gear some chaos units (and leaders) towards close combat and pull this off 1-2 a game. Im I off in this assumption?

It's not really that it's hard to pull off, but that it removes an element of tactical flexibility for an uncertain payoff and Fantasy chaos has a different character to it.

In Fantasy, Chaos has a much more individualistic feel, it's a natural religion (or actually, reality) for the men of the North, and it's a natural religious devotion that they excel on the battlefield, proving their worth to their gods though personal combat. In 40k, personal combat doesn't hold as much merit, greater deeds do, and for many Chaos is a means to an end that ultimately consumes them.

Additionally, in Fantasy, Chaos characters are Character Killers, they are stronger, faster, tougher, killier and better skilled than the vast majority of their equivalents. A Chaos Warrior unit champion can match an Empire General in a test of blades, while a Chaos Lord is matched pretty much only by Ogre Tyrants and Karl Franz's magic "I kill you" hammer. The "must challenge" aspect reinforces their fluff and their role on the battlefield. In 40k, Chaos characters are basically Marines, not particularly special or different really, thus the rule reinforces nothing.

Lacking invulnerable saves means they're fodder for the first guy to turn up with a power sword.

If you spend points doing them up, then they're expensive fodder for the first guy to turn up with a power sword.

Basically the problem with challenging is the same for everyone. If you're a good assaulter, think Marine Captain with claws or claw and fist, you'll never fight another equal character, you'll just be butchering sergeants. If you're not a good assaulter, think sergeant anything, then your humble lot in life is to challenge said good characters in order to save your squad from first turn butchery. After which you're dead and the squad gets butchered anyway.

The challenge mechanism is just a fantasy tack on that just doesn't work in the 40k universe. Why bother going mano a mano, when I can just shoot you in the face?

 Vaktathi wrote:
Additionally, in Fantasy, Chaos characters are Character Killers, they are stronger, faster, tougher, killier and better skilled than the vast majority of their equivalents. A Chaos Warrior unit champion can match an Empire General in a test of blades, while a Chaos Lord is matched pretty much only by Ogre Tyrants and Karl Franz's magic "I kill you" hammer. The "must challenge" aspect reinforces their fluff and their role on the battlefield. In 40k, Chaos characters are basically Marines, not particularly special or different really, thus the rule reinforces nothing.

Disagree here Vaktathi. Chaos has always been about individual achievement and units are lead by the strongest followers of the chaos powers, even in 40k. Thus each time that aspiring champion or Lord goes into single combat, the level of his devotion to chaos and his worthiness to chaos are tested. Sure 40k characters are (thankfully these days!) a bit more balanced overall, that doesn't take away the personal nature of chaos worship. In Space marine chapters the longest serving usually end up in leadership roles, where on the chaos side is all about personal power and personal ability to enforce that leadership role, thus,but constantly charging in and challanging enemy leaders the chaos champion in 40k continues to show his suitability and authority to lead his followers. It all makes perfect sense. Not sure why you accept it fine in WFB, but somehow see it as different in 40k.

Skriker

 Skriker wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Additionally, in Fantasy, Chaos characters are Character Killers, they are stronger, faster, tougher, killier and better skilled than the vast majority of their equivalents. A Chaos Warrior unit champion can match an Empire General in a test of blades, while a Chaos Lord is matched pretty much only by Ogre Tyrants and Karl Franz's magic "I kill you" hammer. The "must challenge" aspect reinforces their fluff and their role on the battlefield. In 40k, Chaos characters are basically Marines, not particularly special or different really, thus the rule reinforces nothing.

Disagree here Vaktathi. Chaos has always been about individual achievement and units are lead by the strongest followers of the chaos powers, even in 40k. Thus each time that aspiring champion or Lord goes into single combat, the level of his devotion to chaos and his worthiness to chaos are tested. Sure 40k characters are (thankfully these days!) a bit more balanced overall, that doesn't take away the personal nature of chaos worship. In Space marine chapters the longest serving usually end up in leadership roles, where on the chaos side is all about personal power and personal ability to enforce that leadership role, thus,but constantly charging in and challanging enemy leaders the chaos champion in 40k continues to show his suitability and authority to lead his followers. It all makes perfect sense. Not sure why you accept it fine in WFB, but somehow see it as different in 40k.

Skriker

I had thought I spelled out my reasons. In 40k, while the element is present, I'm not saying it isn't, a Chaos Lord or Champion often is just as fine with bombarding his foe from orbit as gutting them himself, or just drowning him in weenies while he does something more entertaining/important, while in Fantasy this usually much less common.

And from a gameplay perspective, again, Fantasy Chaos characters are *very* powerful (and expensive) relative to their equivalents, and are very much designed as Character Killers and the rule reinforces their role on the table. A kitted Fantasy Chaos Lord has an obscene statline, they're something you throw a cannon at or try and kill through magic, almost never through combat. In 40k however, chaos characters aren't really much different from most other armies, you kill them pretty much the same way and just as easily as any other typical character, and the rule doesn't reinforce any battlefield role.

This thread is all I really need to post when I want to say how I feel about the new Codex:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/482045.page

Disappointed. I just managed to see a copy and wow is it utterly devoid of inspiration. Literally the only good thing about the entire book is the Chaos Boon Table. I love Slaves to Darkness so to see this again is fantastic. I don't understand how Phil Kelly could write such an interesting table and then just screw up everything else?
Khorne got worse which is my main army. At least I never really used Khorne Berzerkers because then I'd be really upset.

I'm sure my friends will love it though, because it's "balanced" when it reality it just sucks because everything is overpriced and underpowered for what you get. It's also more fun to play against a sucky army where all of your stuff looks good, even DA tactical marines are decently costed in comparison.

I like it personally. It's much better than the last codex. It would have been better if it included cult terminators etc like the 3.5 codex but we can't have everything.

I like this codex... I like the handling of marks and icons and how more units can use them, I like the treatment of basic chaos space marines, I like inclusion of Cultists, the emphasis on Daemon Engine Vehicles. I like how the marks and icons help to reinforce the tone setting of gods on the army... I like that the chaos god's weren't over emphasized for characters. I like the addition of Dark Apostle and Warpsmith, though the Warpsmith does beg fluffish questions since chaos already had obliterators who were suppose to have been Techmarines before they messed themselve up.,, now we have two things. Simultaneously, I didn't have a problem with Mutilators being spun off as a separate unit, but despite the obvious relation between Mutilators and Obliterators, there doesn't seem to be any explanation of that relationship... I also think there is no longer any justifiable reason these two aren't capable of forming 5 model squads. Rubric marine sorcerers should have been able to upgrade their mastery level, and noise marines shouldn't have to take 10 models to take their heavy sonic weapon. I like Berzerkers, I think they walk the line between elite and troop well. I think Defilers, despite their point costs are still worthwhile fun. I like the Warptalon concept, but the execution rules and model wise were a bit weak. I'm really enjoying Daemonic possession on my vindicator and my wall of chaos spawn became more than just wound absorbers. In the previous codex, Dreadnoughts were almost unusable... now they work, though it seems funny to make them so distinctively different visually without distinguishing their rules from loyalists.

Much of what people don't like can't be broken down into two categories... "me too" and ""x" should have been included."

The "me too" players are those that see some advantage of another codex and thinks Chaos Marines should have a similar advantage, while I see many of those things to be inequities that skew the game into power creep. I might go as far as to say they're broken, so I don't want to see Chaos broken just to keep pace, but that would imply I care more than I really do about balance.

The ""x" should be included" crowd are simply those who wanted a larger scope to this codex, which is fair. Its just that the scope and its limitations are defined by what GW can reasonably support. We got a reeasonable release with very few rereleases. Given the shift away from waved releases, I don't think GW could support releasing anything else in this codex. So GW zeroed in on a size to this book which unfortunately means leaving out anything that would insist on additional support. Particularly as GW moves away from just having rules that aren't associated with specific models. Legion specific rules being an example of this.

Legion rules would be great; I'm a big fan of seeing players with as many tools for personalizing their armies, but I don't think Legion specific rules are necessary especially in the context of a single codex. Many complain that there aren't rules for the "Legions" but I think "Veterans of the Long War" notionally represents the legionaries who've been fighting this war for that long. That's enough for me, not for others. Legion specific rules are like putting chaos under a magnifying glass, and if they were included for all the legions it'd focusing on one thing to the detriment of the other flavors of chaos. GW has said nearly 1/2 of all Chaos Space marines are renegades and not legionaries. In the context of a single book, having legion specific rules would allow these different groups which represent 1/18th of chaos marines at best relagating 50% who have little in relation to the other 50% to less than a 10th the emphasis in the codex... all the while GW's trying to push people to use the Renegades a basis for their mix and matched armies.

 Vladsimpaler wrote:

I'm sure my friends will love it though, because it's "balanced" when it reality it just sucks because everything is overpriced and underpowered for what you get. It's also more fun to play against a sucky army where all of your stuff looks good, even DA tactical marines are decently costed in comparison.

Not to be cinical, but I have to wonder how many of those 'likes' actually mean "I LIKE that my IG/GK/SW/Necron army's spot on the power level scale is unchanged."

To be completely honest, I am on the fence about the new codex. It is wonderfully produced, with some cool new units, and options that are reminiscent of 4ed, but I feel like they dropped the ball on some cult units. The noise marines are denied their Blastmaster even when numbering 6 (as per fluff) and the thousand sons, being take and hold units are anything but when it comes to assault units. I am not saying that the Thousand Sons should get a CC buff, but I am saying that they should at least get the ability to stand and shoot at whatever is charging them, like every other unit in the game that doesn't have template weapons. I am also pissed that the Aspiring Sorcerer is only a mastery level 1, essentially restricting him to the three worst spells in the book... Come on Phil Kelly!

It's a disappointing book to say the least. Some of the overpricing (defiler) and outright nerfs (obliterators) are a shameless tactic to get you to buy the new magazords.

But I will still play it lol, been playing chaos since the Slaves to darkness came out and i will stick with it. I just would of liked some flavor.

 Skriker wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Additionally, in Fantasy, Chaos characters are Character Killers, they are stronger, faster, tougher, killier and better skilled than the vast majority of their equivalents. A Chaos Warrior unit champion can match an Empire General in a test of blades, while a Chaos Lord is matched pretty much only by Ogre Tyrants and Karl Franz's magic "I kill you" hammer. The "must challenge" aspect reinforces their fluff and their role on the battlefield. In 40k, Chaos characters are basically Marines, not particularly special or different really, thus the rule reinforces nothing.

Disagree here Vaktathi. Chaos has always been about individual achievement and units are lead by the strongest followers of the chaos powers, even in 40k. Thus each time that aspiring champion or Lord goes into single combat, the level of his devotion to chaos and his worthiness to chaos are tested. Sure 40k characters are (thankfully these days!) a bit more balanced overall, that doesn't take away the personal nature of chaos worship. In Space marine chapters the longest serving usually end up in leadership roles, where on the chaos side is all about personal power and personal ability to enforce that leadership role, thus,but constantly charging in and challanging enemy leaders the chaos champion in 40k continues to show his suitability and authority to lead his followers. It all makes perfect sense. Not sure why you accept it fine in WFB, but somehow see it as different in 40k.

Skriker

And that's why Chaos Lords have better statlines than Chapter Masters. Oh wait, no they don't.

Also, remember that time when Perturabo ascended to daemonhood by accepting a challenge from Rogal Dorn. Oh wait, no he did EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 aka_mythos wrote:
I like inclusion of Cultists

Even though I fully expected this to be a weaksauce Gavdex 2.0 from the beginning (I predicted that the pendulum would swing back just in time for the release of the CSM dex) I almost got my hopes up when I heard that cultists would be in the starter set. But then I look at the cultist entry and the only options they have are the ones that are physically modeled on the figs in the starter set. The champ has literally ONE weapon option and this is only to make the starter set champ WYSIWYG. I am then forced to conclude that the ONLY reason they bothered to put cultists in the CSM codex is so they could include squishy things in the starter set for the SM to kill. By the time 6th ed CSM rolls around I predict cultists will be gone. Like rain on the mountain. Like wind in the meadow. Like LatD in the EoT codex. Le sigh.

Overall, I would say it is pretty good, and I have been playing since third edition. You can make some really good lists with it.
It's not overpowered, but it's not underpowered either. The more I read it and play with lists, the more it grows on me.

It could have gone a lot further like many have mentioned, but is very playable and very cool.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

 Skriker wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Additionally, in Fantasy, Chaos characters are Character Killers, they are stronger, faster, tougher, killier and better skilled than the vast majority of their equivalents. A Chaos Warrior unit champion can match an Empire General in a test of blades, while a Chaos Lord is matched pretty much only by Ogre Tyrants and Karl Franz's magic "I kill you" hammer. The "must challenge" aspect reinforces their fluff and their role on the battlefield. In 40k, Chaos characters are basically Marines, not particularly special or different really, thus the rule reinforces nothing.

Disagree here Vaktathi. Chaos has always been about individual achievement and units are lead by the strongest followers of the chaos powers, even in 40k. Thus each time that aspiring champion or Lord goes into single combat, the level of his devotion to chaos and his worthiness to chaos are tested. Sure 40k characters are (thankfully these days!) a bit more balanced overall, that doesn't take away the personal nature of chaos worship. In Space marine chapters the longest serving usually end up in leadership roles, where on the chaos side is all about personal power and personal ability to enforce that leadership role, thus,but constantly charging in and challanging enemy leaders the chaos champion in 40k continues to show his suitability and authority to lead his followers. It all makes perfect sense. Not sure why you accept it fine in WFB, but somehow see it as different in 40k.

Skriker

And that's why Chaos Lords have better statlines than Chapter Masters. Oh wait, no they don't.

Also, remember that time when Perturabo ascended to daemonhood by accepting a challenge from Rogal Dorn. Oh wait, no he did EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 aka_mythos wrote:
I like inclusion of Cultists

Even though I fully expected this to be a weaksauce Gavdex 2.0 from the beginning (I predicted that the pendulum would swing back just in time for the release of the CSM dex) I almost got my hopes up when I heard that cultists would be in the starter set. But then I look at the cultist entry and the only options they have are the ones that are physically modeled on the figs in the starter set. The champ has literally ONE weapon option and this is only to make the starter set champ WYSIWYG. I am then forced to conclude that the ONLY reason they bothered to put cultists in the CSM codex is so they could include squishy things in the starter set for the SM to kill. By the time 6th ed CSM rolls around I predict cultists will be gone. Like rain on the mountain. Like wind in the meadow. Like LatD in the EoT codex. Le sigh.

I think you need to look at the cultists closer, and the synergy they have with the different IC's. A blob of 35 fearless cultists being led by a tooled out chaos lord or dark apostle is nasty. Combine that with the different psycic powers available, and there are some devastating combinations.
The cultists were a very intentional entry in the codex, and are very powerful if you know how to use them. The wargear options on the cultists are really a minor point. The pistol and close combat weapon is all they need.

Firstborn wrote:
I think you need to look at the cultists closer, and the synergy they have with the different IC's. A blob of 35 fearless cultists being led by a tooled out chaos lord or dark apostle is nasty. Combine that with the different psycic powers available, and there are some devastating combinations.
The cultists were a very intentional entry in the codex, and are very powerful if you know how to use them. The wargear options on the cultists are really a minor point. The pistol and close combat weapon is all they need.

Considering allies are a thing, the only advantage cultists have over an imperial guardsman is that you can have one of your ICs join the first but not the latter. I'm not saying it's a terrible advantage, but with allies being a thing there is practically no reason to field autogun cultists, as they are basically guardsmen with worse equipment.

... Wow. It really takes a lot to be worse equipped than an IG guardsman, I'm still surprised it happened. At least, for the price of a conscript, you get someone with pistol and CCW, so that's two WS 3 S3 attacks from each of your expendables!

... At I1, because no grenades lol.

Frankly, the codex is not bad, and if this really becomes the new 6th edition power level instead of a low swing on the pendulum to be duly corrected when the next iteration of Space Jocks comes around, I'm completely fine with it.

The problem is that there are parts that are just outright lazy. Tell me again for what reason I should ever take a Dark Apostle, ever? Since it is inferior to a Lord in every possible way and also more expensive? Tell me again why the Mark of Khorne needed a nerf? Tell me again why CC troops in general needed a nerf, considering 6th edition already nerfed that on its own? Tell me again why Chosen have 2 attacks base but friggin' Khorne Berzerkers have ONE? Tell me again why the cult troops of Slaanesh with their special sonic weapons are worse at firing on the move than random blokes with a cheap boltgun? Tell me again why I shouldn't shelf my sisters now that for one more point you get a space mar- Er, no, wait, that's a bit off topic.

I like chaos being chaotic, I enjoy its plethora of new options and potential synergies, I like all the fiddly options and the new weapons (we certainly could have used a really generic daemon weapon though) and I believe the codex got a massive improvement over the poor excuse of a clusterfeth it was in its last iteration. Overall, it's a good codex, but it really, really suffers from being this edition's guinea pig.

... I mean seriously, defilers at 195 points? Are you kidding me? 10 extra points for a Land Raider for zero improvements and still no PotMS-equivalent? Daemonic possession was nerfed and it still costs you a point of BS? Is this gak for real? And wait, the last and most unknown of nameless wolf lords is an eternal warrior but Lucius THE ETERNAL is not? And neither are all those blokes that have been around since the friggin' Horus Heresy (with the exception of Abby)? Oh for f-

 Mokuren wrote:

Firstborn wrote:
I think you need to look at the cultists closer, and the synergy they have with the different IC's. A blob of 35 fearless cultists being led by a tooled out chaos lord or dark apostle is nasty. Combine that with the different psycic powers available, and there are some devastating combinations.
The cultists were a very intentional entry in the codex, and are very powerful if you know how to use them. The wargear options on the cultists are really a minor point. The pistol and close combat weapon is all they need.

Considering allies are a thing, the only advantage cultists have over an imperial guardsman is that you can have one of your ICs join the first but not the latter. I'm not saying it's a terrible advantage, but with allies being a thing there is practically no reason to field autogun cultists, as they are basically guardsmen with worse equipment.

... Wow. It really takes a lot to be worse equipped than an IG guardsman, I'm still surprised it happened. At least, for the price of a conscript, you get someone with pistol and CCW, so that's two WS 3 S3 attacks from each of your expendables!

... At I1, because no grenades lol.

I look at the Chaos Daemons and the unit changes they got through White Dwarf relatively recently... I'm inclined to believe Cultists, whenever they get a separate kit will likely see a similar revised treatment, to incoporate new options.

Chaos cultists are cheaper than guardsmen, so its not like you're being short changed, but they allow you to take marks in dedication to their respective god. The marks for the most part bring them to a similar cost while making them equally or more worthwhile. That's before you even consider the plague zombie option.

Cultists probably shouldn't have to pay for their close combat weapons, but lets face it, they're largely a unit intended for the thematics. Even in the best fiction the cultists at the level of theses guys get mowed down. They're just a source of ablative wounds in an army that can otherwise run high cost units with a low total wound count.

 Mokuren wrote:

The problem is that there are parts that are just outright lazy. Tell me again for what reason I should ever take a Dark Apostle, ever? Since it is inferior to a Lord in every possible way and also more expensive?

The Dark Apostle has a Leadership bubble, so units beside the one he's in can benefit from it, unlike the Lord. He also comes standard with Fearless and Hatred, by means of the Zealot rule. So taking the Dark Apostle is about the utility of the leadership bubble, which is mostly for those wanting to field cultists or marines that haven't taken "Veterans of the Long War".

 Mokuren wrote:

Tell me again why the Mark of Khorne needed a nerf? Tell me again why CC troops in general needed a nerf, considering 6th edition already nerfed that on its own? Tell me again why Chosen have 2 attacks base but friggin' Khorne Berzerkers have ONE? Tell me again why the cult troops of Slaanesh with their special sonic weapons are worse at firing on the move than random blokes with a cheap boltgun? Tell me again why I shouldn't shelf my sisters now that for one more point you get a space mar- Er, no, wait, that's a bit off topic

I dunno if it was even said in the first place... but I'd guess the reason the Mark of Khorne was "nerfed" was some combination of wanting it to be subjectively on a similar level to the rest and also to adjust for the fact that more units have access to it now.

Chosen are basically meant as a squad of guys on the verge of being aspiring champions, while Berzerkers are just specialized line troops with dedication to a deity.

Noise marines I think are a fair price, coming with the +1I and Fearless built in. They're really just a basic tac. squad type unit that simply plays generally static. I think its interesting that the units of the deity that Khorne regards as slothful and lazy are now a unit thats seemingly designed to play a more static game. I think ignore cover makes sense, I think it makes up for the salvo rule defficiencies as well as the additional cost. I do however feel GW has spent the last 3 editions scratching their heads as to "why did we give them sonic weapons," so while they might not be the greatest I don't think we're paying more than what they're worth.

Look, SoB have many issues and those should be addressed in their book. Not the Chaos book. As to why basic CSM are cheaper, its because GW doesn't really expect too many people to use them in a barebone configuration. They expect players to upgrade them, that means they have to leave room for those additional costs. This is just simply an inherent shortfall of a system based on whole number points, SoB might nominally be 12.5pts and base line CSM 14.4pts in a perfect world but design choices impose how things are rounded.

 aka_mythos wrote:

Chaos cultists are cheaper than guardsmen, so its not like you're being short changed, but they allow you to take marks in dedication to their respective god. The marks for the most part bring them to a similar cost while making them equally or more worthwhile. That's before you even consider the plague zombie option.

It's up for debate if marks make cultists effective; IG still have better weapon access, can take orders (a very powerful thing, and free) and transports for a very good price.

 Sephyr wrote:

It's up for debate if marks make cultists effective; IG still have better weapon access, can take orders (a very powerful thing, and free) and transports for a very good price. ...

 aka_mythos wrote:

The Dark Apostle has a Leadership bubble, so units beside the one he's in can benefit from it, unlike the Lord. He also comes standard with Fearless and Hatred, by means of the Zealot rule. So taking the Dark Apostle is about the utility of the leadership bubble, which is mostly for those wanting to field cultists or marines that haven't taken "Veterans of the Long War".

There are many better ways to get the Hatred Rule. The extra Leadership is usually just an extra point per piece, making the bubble useless unless you use it for Mutilators...which no sane person will take. The CSM HQ slot is way too important to waste on someone who adds so little, and almost none of it unique; we need to unlock cult troops or get killing machines that actually maul units and win duels.

Cultists are largely ablative wounds and wouldn't do that job in a transport. They are to either absorb wounds or to largely go on ignored, neither requiring special weapons. Not everyone is going to want to play your notion of a chaos army and there are alot of people who want to field a wall of cultists because they like the idea of a mob... other will simply take a large block of cultists to fill out their troop choices with the cheapest option so they can put more points into other units.

Orders are a byproduct of the Command HQ and Platoon Commmand Squads and to that end is a synergistic attribute... Posing a fair comparison would require you to consider the inclucion in the army of HQ choices that aid Cultists. The Dark Apostle being the seemingly most specifically designed to aid cultists. I believe he conveys hatred to the cultists and is really the only way for cultists to gain a leadership bump. This is one of the main reasons to include the Dark Apostle. I think we'd agree he's a niche unit and only to be used by a handful of specific armies. Not every one plays their armies in an 'Ard Boys level of ultra-competetiveness.

Another minor point is that Veteran of the Long War only conveys Hatred (Space Marines)... The Dark Apostles is the poster child for "Hater's gonna Hate" since he conveys Hatred (everything).

 Sephyr wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
Cultists probably shouldn't have to pay for their close combat weapons, but lets face it, they're largely a unit intended for the thematics. Even in the best fiction the cultists at the level of theses guys get mowed down.

Funny, because in the fluff that's pretty much what IG does! Die by the bucketload while the marines save the day. And yet in the rules they are masters of small-unit special weapons spam and aerial-armor combined warfare. Even if cultists were just fodder, there are so many better ways to work with that.

The difference is in the fluff even the IG get to mow them down. Someone compared them to conscripts and that's a far fairer starting point for comparison. They're conscripts that can be upgraded up to something bordering on being as usefull as standard guardmen.

It just needs to emphasize these are Chaos Cultists, they aren't traitors, the aren't blood pact. These guys are little more than on the level of a necromunda hive gang up until the moment they join a chaos warband, and their equipment and options reflects that.

 Sephyr wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:

As to why basic CSM are cheaper, its because GW doesn't really expect too many people to use them in a barebone configuration. They expect players to upgrade them, that means they have to leave room for those additional costs.

That's a design philosophy they adhere to very infrequently then, and with suspicious timing. It would make sense if you could purchase Split Fire for Long Fangs, Psychic Pilot for GK vehicles, Warp Quake and Pyker defense for GKs, and PotMS for loyalist vehicles. Instead those things come free.

I think they've done it here because they wanted a single unit entry to represent everything from the newest Renegades to the Legionaries as well as units at varying stages of progression down the path to corruption in their favor seeking of a chaos god. Even if it wasn't done for that specific reason, in the absence of that even more people would complain that CSM aren't cost effective... Yes you heard me right some people actually believe they don't do enough... I don't understand that idea, but there you go.

 aka_mythos wrote:


Orders are a byproduct of the Command HQ and Platoon Commmand Squads and to that end is a synergistic attribute... Posing a fair comparison would require you to consider the inclucion in the army of HQ choices that aid Cultists. The Dark Apostle being the seemingly most specifically designed to aid cultists. I believe he conveys hatred to the cultists and is really the only way for cultists to gain a leadership bump. This is one of the main reasons to include the Dark Apostle. I think we'd agree he's a niche unit and only to be used by a handful of specific armies. Not every one plays their armies in an 'Ard Boys level of ultra-competetiveness.

Another minor point is that Veteran of the Long War only conveys Hatred (Space Marines)... The Dark Apostles is the poster child for "Hater's gonna Hate" since he conveys Hatred (everything).

True enough, but you mentioned Cultists in addition to both the Apostle and Typhus, so I felt the point was justified. In addition, no CSM force is getting just IG guardmen allies; you need an HQ, and the command squad is quite cost-effective. In fact, both have the advantage of not overcrowding CSM FOC slots.

As for the Apostle, he makes his unit Fearless, as does any Fearless HQ, meaning that all of them give the cultists a Leadership bump. And he is not killy enough by far to make a cultist mob a threat. So even at his niche, he's a day late and a dollar short.

Firstborn wrote:
I think you need to look at the cultists closer, and the synergy they have with the different IC's. A blob of 35 fearless cultists being led by a tooled out chaos lord or dark apostle is nasty. Combine that with the different psycic powers available, and there are some devastating combinations.
The cultists were a very intentional entry in the codex, and are very powerful if you know how to use them. The wargear options on the cultists are really a minor point. The pistol and close combat weapon is all they need.

Cultists are good ablative wounds, but what for? A tooled out Lord, that's what, a Dark Apostle is weaker and more expensive than a Lord and giving hatred to a 35 blob of guardsmen with worse armour doesn't change the fact that, well, you're giving hatred to a 35 blob of guardsmen with worse armour. They attack after most units that are actually worth a damn in CC, and with their t-shirt save they're just like ork boyz when it comes to taking overwatch in the teeth, except without the T4.

Firstborn wrote:Chaos cultists are cheaper than guardsmen, so its not like you're being short changed, but they allow you to take marks in dedication to their respective god. The marks for the most part bring them to a similar cost while making them equally or more worthwhile. That's before you even consider the plague zombie option.

Cultists probably shouldn't have to pay for their close combat weapons, but lets face it, they're largely a unit intended for the thematics. Even in the best fiction the cultists at the level of theses guys get mowed down. They're just a source of ablative wounds in an army that can otherwise run high cost units with a low total wound count.

A cultist is 1 point cheaper, per model, than an ordinary guardsman, but this doesn't account for the fact that they come with worse armour, no grenades and only one champion: every infantry squad comes with 10 models of which one is a sarge. Also, a blob of 35 is the same cost as an entire basic IG platoon, that comes with orders and better equipment: ten less models, but twice the range and much more firepower, and three times as many characters. Also, sarges come with krak grenades, can take melta bombs and power weapons and bolt pistols and plasma pistols, so if you're willing to shell more points you get something that is a lot more versatile than a cultist champion.

Cultists certainly have a place, but I'm sure it is not to make Dark Apostles shine, they're just cheap objective sitters and lone HQ escort.

Firstborn wrote:I dunno if it was even said in the first place... but I'd guess the reason the Mark of Khorne was "nerfed" was some combination of wanting it to be subjectively on a similar level to the rest and also to adjust for the fact that more units have access to it now.

It's not on a similar level to the rest, it's a whole lot weaker: I agree that a 6++ save is arguably even weaker, but at least Tzeentch's mark is situational, meaning it really does give benefits to units that already have an invulnerable save, such as terminators. But compared to the Mark of Nurgle? Total and utter no brainer there. Even a Mark of Slaanesh is more useful than that of Khorne.

As for more units having access to it... Why would that require a nerf? You still pay for marking units, even those that previously didn't have access to such option, so why does this justify making the mark weaker? That just makes no sense, also because none of the other marks (Tzeentch aside) got nerfed in any way or form. To say nothing of Spawns, who already come with Rage, so they only benefit from one half of the mark!

Firstborn wrote:Look, SoB have many issues and those should be addressed in their book. Not the Chaos book. As to why basic CSM are cheaper, its because GW doesn't really expect too many people to use them in a barebone configuration. They expect players to upgrade them, that means they have to leave room for those additional costs. This is just simply an inherent shortfall of a system based on whole number points, SoB might nominally be 12.5pts and base line CSM 14.4pts in a perfect world but design choices impose how things are rounded.

Oh, I agree SoB have many issues that need to be addressed in a new Codex that will never come, but I really disagree that CSM cost little because they're supposed to be upgraded. I don't know about you, but fielding Tactical Marines without ATSKNF for 13 points per model instead of 15 or 16 is enough justification to field plenty of them. With Chaos, you can field a blob of 20 like that and spend 20 more points than it would cost to do the same with SoB, except they have a Space Marine statline, which is nothing to sneeze at.

Cultists are largely ablative wounds and wouldn't do that job in a transport. They are to either absorb wounds or to largely go on ignored, neither requiring special weapons. Not everyone is going to want to play your notion of a chaos army and there are alot of people who want to field a wall of cultists because they like the idea of a mob... other will simply take a large block of cultists to fill out their troop choices with the cheapest option so they can put more points into other units.

Orders are a byproduct of the Command HQ and Platoon Commmand Squads and to that end is a synergistic attribute... Posing a fair comparison would require you to consider the inclucion in the army of HQ choices that aid Cultists. The Dark Apostle being the seemingly most specifically designed to aid cultists. I believe he conveys hatred to the cultists and is really the only way for cultists to gain a leadership bump. This is one of the main reasons to include the Dark Apostle. I think we'd agree he's a niche unit and only to be used by a handful of specific armies. Not every one plays their armies in an 'Ard Boys level of ultra-competetiveness.

Another minor point is that Veteran of the Long War only conveys Hatred (Space Marines)... The Dark Apostles is the poster child for "Hater's gonna Hate" since he conveys Hatred (everything).

A Platoon Command Squad is included in every infantry platoon, so you're pretty much forced to take them (not that it's a bad thing) and the synergy they provide is much better than what a Dark Apostle can do. Even a Company Command Squad is cheaper and has two orders and more of them. To Synergize with cultists, you need to stick a Lord inside (which makes them Fearless) or a Dark Apostle (which makes them Fearless and Hate everything), but you're not making them more versatile: you're just making them not flee and, in the second case, reroll hits against everything in the first turn of CC, but they will never shoot better or improve their cover saves or recover from having gone to ground or fleeing. You can only ever make them better in CC, at the expense of using a horribly precious HQ slot that has the same stats as a Sorcerer, doesn't come with a force weapon (and is instead forced to take a power maul) and is just 5 points cheaper than a level 2 psyker.

Yes, a blob of 35 fearless cultists with hatred actually can do something in CC that might be worth their cost, but a lot of them will die before actually getting to attack in CC, be it because of overwatch, I3 or no grenades, and this trick just costed you about 20 points less than fielding a blob of 20 non-fearless CSM, that however fight better, kill better, shoot better, save better, attack earlier and are a bit more than just fodder while your HQ murders someone else's character. And by the way, a Lord does that way better than an Apostle thanks to having a better statline, and even with the same equipment he still costs less and still grants fearless.

I'd rather have a 20 blob of CSM with bolt pistol and CCW to escort a killy HQ, the only situation in which they'd be worse is if the opponent has plenty of AP2-3 pie plates or has nothing but antitank weaponry, in which case I hope he has a very good target priority because a unit like this is still below 400 points, so I can still very much focus on long range support and artillery of my own.

What I'm trying to say is that cultists are not useless, the Dark Apostle is: he just doesn't live up to the deal and doesn't benefit cultists enough to justify its cost, it's another prime example of the CSM codex lacking internal balance, you have absolutely gorgeous choices right next to blatantly inferior ones and I have literally no idea how this could have appened.

Wow!

Even with all the interwebz raging and all the talking heads hating, 75% of us like it.

Hmm...

 Sephyr wrote:


True enough, but you mentioned Cultists in addition to both the Apostle and Typhus, so I felt the point was justified. In addition, no CSM force is getting just IG guardmen allies; you need an HQ, and the command squad is quite cost-effective. In fact, both have the advantage of not overcrowding CSM FOC slots.

As for the Apostle, he makes his unit Fearless, as does any Fearless HQ, meaning that all of them give the cultists a Leadership bump. And he is not killy enough by far to make a cultist mob a threat. So even at his niche, he's a day late and a dollar short.

It's a justified point. I think though if you're taking an IG HQ and then a Platoon, your intent for the unit is a bit different. THe use of the Dark Apostle isn't for a single unit of cultists but mostly for an army of cultists. I don't think he's a great unit, I just think he's meant to represent something specific and to allow a patricular type of army. Can we take IG allies?-Sure but then we're playing Chaos Marines and Traitors and not Chaos Marines and Chaos Cultists. There is a reason why in the fluff a bigger deal is made of traitor guard than cultists and why Chaos appreciates the improved reliability of traitors... Traitors are just rarer.

Taking cultists over IG allies is a case of intended use and cost. You don't need the Apostle to make the unit worthwhile particularly if you're limited in the number of points you have. IG you'd end up spending atleast 270pts before any upgrades, for a command and a platoon. If your including cultists out of some limitation of points you're not going to be able to drop that many points on IG allies.

 Lobukia wrote:
Wow!

Even with all the interwebz raging and all the talking heads hating, 75% of us like it.

Hmm...

The question is, is, what basis are they voting on? Is it all they wanted it to be, is it a well balanced flavorful book, is it merely just better than the last one, or is it just something new?

At the time it was released, I recall similar polls of people liking the 4E codex too, because it was new and shiny.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?103681-Are-you-Happy-with-the-new-Chaos-Codex&highlight=chaos+codex

 Mokuren wrote:

Firstborn wrote:
I think you need to look at the cultists closer, and the synergy they have with the different IC's. A blob of 35 fearless cultists being led by a tooled out chaos lord or dark apostle is nasty. Combine that with the different psycic powers available, and there are some devastating combinations.
The cultists were a very intentional entry in the codex, and are very powerful if you know how to use them. The wargear options on the cultists are really a minor point. The pistol and close combat weapon is all they need.

Considering allies are a thing, the only advantage cultists have over an imperial guardsman is that you can have one of your ICs join the first but not the latter. I'm not saying it's a terrible advantage, but with allies being a thing there is practically no reason to field autogun cultists, as they are basically guardsmen with worse equipment.

... Wow. It really takes a lot to be worse equipped than an IG guardsman, I'm still surprised it happened. At least, for the price of a conscript, you get someone with pistol and CCW, so that's two WS 3 S3 attacks from each of your expendables!

... At I1, because no grenades lol.

Frankly, the codex is not bad, and if this really becomes the new 6th edition power level instead of a low swing on the pendulum to be duly corrected when the next iteration of Space Jocks comes around, I'm completely fine with it.

The problem is that there are parts that are just outright lazy. Tell me again for what reason I should ever take a Dark Apostle, ever? Since it is inferior to a Lord in every possible way and also more expensive? Tell me again why the Mark of Khorne needed a nerf? Tell me again why CC troops in general needed a nerf, considering 6th edition already nerfed that on its own? Tell me again why Chosen have 2 attacks base but friggin' Khorne Berzerkers have ONE? Tell me again why the cult troops of Slaanesh with their special sonic weapons are worse at firing on the move than random blokes with a cheap boltgun? Tell me again why I shouldn't shelf my sisters now that for one more point you get a space mar- Er, no, wait, that's a bit off topic.

I like chaos being chaotic, I enjoy its plethora of new options and potential synergies, I like all the fiddly options and the new weapons (we certainly could have used a really generic daemon weapon though) and I believe the codex got a massive improvement over the poor excuse of a clusterfeth it was in its last iteration. Overall, it's a good codex, but it really, really suffers from being this edition's guinea pig.

... I mean seriously, defilers at 195 points? Are you kidding me? 10 extra points for a Land Raider for zero improvements and still no PotMS-equivalent? Daemonic possession was nerfed and it still costs you a point of BS? Is this gak for real? And wait, the last and most unknown of nameless wolf lords is an eternal warrior but Lucius THE ETERNAL is not? And neither are all those blokes that have been around since the friggin' Horus Heresy (with the exception of Abby)? Oh for f-

"is that you can have one of your ICs join the first but not the latter."
This is HUGE, however. The IC's are designed to work in tandem with the cultists. And also by doing this, you leave open the possibility of daemon allies.


"Tell me again why Chosen have 2 attacks base but friggin' Khorne Berzerkers have ONE?"Khorne Berzerkers have 2 base, 1 + pistol\CCW = 2. On the charge they have rage, so 4 attacks total. Combine this with Furious charge. and
it is brutal. And the big one; Khorne Berzerkers are typically scoring models.

Veterans of the long war can be absolutely game changing when fighting other MEQ lists.

"defilers at 195 points? Are you kidding me?"
I think they are priced about right for what they do. I personally wouldn't take them if I was going into a tournament seeking 1st place, but in casual or semi-competitive games they can be awesome.


" the last and most unknown of nameless wolf lords is an eternal warrior but Lucius THE ETERNAL is not?"
I agree, there could have been more thought put into this. I believe the pricing\options of the SW codex are over the top in general. However, the ability to make virtually anything T5 helps mitigate this a lot.

on a slightly related subject, i am looking for a reason why i should or should not start a csm army

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/483303.page

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
Wow!

Even with all the interwebz raging and all the talking heads hating, 75% of us like it.

Hmm...

The question is, is, what basis are they voting on? Is it all they wanted it to be, is it a well balanced flavorful book, is it merely just better than the last one, or is it just something new?

At the time it was released, I recall similar polls of people liking the 4E codex too, because it was new and shiny.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?103681-Are-you-Happy-with-the-new-Chaos-Codex&highlight=chaos+codex

You can't deny that it is much better, and has far more options than the last codex. And contrary to popular belief, the last codex actually held up well on the table
all the way till the end of 5th. I went to a tournament near the end of 5th with the top players in my area. Guess who won? 4E CSM, and the player wasn't even running
Obliterators in his list; true story.

I would suggest enjoying the codex and models if you like them. It is what we have for the next 5 years, and you can make it work if you try. It is not a no-brainer "I win"
button like GK, Necrons, and to a lesser extent SW. But it is very competitive if you know how to use it, and is near the top when you start factoring in daemon allies.

Has anyone thought of the Psyker Battle battle squad playing leadership shenanigans on the Dark Apostle? I play against too many Guard armies to even risk that debacle. Imagine, the Dark Apostle screwing up the LD of some unsuspecting CSM squads right before the mass of templates drop from out of nowhere an make those CSMs run away like scared little girls.

I just want to see it happen once, just once, and see the guard player win in one round of shooting. Although, I do determine if it is worth playing anymore based on if my army survives turn two pie plates to the face, it's not like this little trick gives the Guard player any more of an edge than he/she already has.

I'm not saying it needs to be an I-Win button, merely pointing out that just because a lot of people are voting that they like it doesn't necessarily mean what they think it means and that it may change.

Honestly, my biggest issue isn't with its competitiveness, rather that it still has most of the same issues the previous book did (no proper Cult options outside of 1 unit for each god, awkward hamfisting of Renegades and Legions, etc), feels like it was phoned in on much of it (eh cut 10pts off the top and 2ppm and call it good...), and much of the rest a lot of awkward and unnecessary "change for its own sake" changes.

There's some good stuff, but it doesn't really feel like a good effort.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Honestly, my biggest issue isn't with its competitiveness, rather that it still has most of the same issues the previous book did (no proper Cult options outside of 1 unit for each god, awkward hamfisting of Renegades and Legions, etc), feels like it was phoned in on much of it (eh cut 10pts off the top and 2ppm and call it good...), and much of the rest a lot of awkward and unnecessary "change for its own sake" changes.

There's some good stuff, but it doesn't really feel like a good effort.

I'd say its a good effort on a few things, making it what it should have been.

I just don't think given the scope GW wants to keep the Chaos Space Marines at its reasonable to expect more cult or Legion specific rules, unless GW spins off a separate codex specifically to address them. I think you'll be setting yourself up for disappointment to expect it.

Something else I've been thinking about is that while GW usually takes the lead on the game design front... The fact FW was given the go ahead to do the Horus Heresy models and books may have impacted the mindset for this codex, wherein any thought about more extensively covering the Legions was met with "if you want to play a Legion, buy those FW books." Even the cults could inevitably be covered by the end of the heresy era rules for the god dedicated legions and may well have been treated to the same rationale. I don't like it when people say "there is always FW" but it may very well be GW saying it this time.