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.

I still use the old Chaos codex because, in my opinion, it's more fun. I can have a Tzeentch sorceror blasting my enemies with Khorne Berzerkers. It's not as good or as powerful but goddamnit it's more fun and that's what I'm trying to do - have fun!

Anyone else the same?

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
I still use the old Chaos codex because, in my opinion, it's more fun. I can have a Tzeentch sorceror blasting my enemies with Khorne Berzerkers. It's not as good or as powerful but goddamnit it's more fun and that's what I'm trying to do - have fun!

Anyone else the same?

you know...you can STILL use a Tzeenth Sorcerer going around blasting enemies with your Khorne Berzerkers...just saying

I'm finding myself falling further away from the Chaos Space Marine Army. This latest book is just not my thing.

By the old codex, do you mean the 3.5 ed one, or the Alessio Cavatore/Gav Thorpe one from late 4th? If it's the latter, then I'm really curious what your definitions of "fun" and "flavor" are.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
I still use the old Chaos codex because, in my opinion, it's more fun. I can have a Tzeentch sorceror blasting my enemies with Khorne Berzerkers. It's not as good or as powerful but goddamnit it's more fun and that's what I'm trying to do - have fun!

Anyone else the same?

This is something many found wrong with the previous book, as it's unfluffy as all hell.

Personally, I feel like the new book really isn't anything that a couple pages in White Dwarf couldn't have done, and doesn't really bring the army into 6th edition but merely just cuts some costs of the 4E book and throws in some 6E USR's without really being built around 6E mechanics. It's a little better in terms of fluff, but still very thin in that regard. But overall, still an improvement, as the 4E book was just...bad.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
I still use the old Chaos codex because, in my opinion, it's more fun. I can have a Tzeentch sorceror blasting my enemies with Khorne Berzerkers. It's not as good or as powerful but goddamnit it's more fun and that's what I'm trying to do - have fun!

Anyone else the same?

This is something many found wrong with the previous book, as it's unfluffy as all hell.

Personally, I feel like the new book really isn't anything that a couple pages in White Dwarf couldn't have done, and doesn't really bring the army into 6th edition but merely just cuts some costs of the 4E book and throws in some 6E USR's without really being built around 6E mechanics. It's a little better in terms of fluff, but still very thin in that regard. But overall, still an improvement, as the 4E book was just...bad.

This more or less.

 Brother SRM wrote:
By the old codex, do you mean the 3.5 ed one, or the Alessio Cavatore/Gav Thorpe one from late 4th? If it's the latter, then I'm really curious what your definitions of "fun" and "flavor" are.

Gav's. I don't know - I love flying Daemon Princes and I can justify fielding two (and they have Eternal Warrior). I can have Khorne Berzerkers as troops, no matter what HQ I take. So I like the old 'dex.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:

 Brother SRM wrote:
By the old codex, do you mean the 3.5 ed one, or the Alessio Cavatore/Gav Thorpe one from late 4th? If it's the latter, then I'm really curious what your definitions of "fun" and "flavor" are.

Gav's. I don't know - I love flying Daemon Princes and I can justify fielding two (and they have Eternal Warrior). I can have Khorne Berzerkers as troops, no matter what HQ I take. So I like the old 'dex.

There's an issue there. Flying Princes from last edition were priced thinking it just gave them 6" more movement. You're kind of scrounging for an advantage since being a Flying MC is very powerful now.

Additionally, Khorne Berserkers aren't really that strong compared to CSM. None of the cult troops are, but that's a good thing. When CSM competed directly with every single kind of specialization, it devalued both the CSM and the specializations. It was like eating nothing but cake. The new book finally gave us some hearty apples and steak.

In the old codex, they're just jump monstrous creatures aren't they?

The last codex had a FAQ to make them flying monstrous creatures, I think?

But whatever makes ya happy

The old Codex is LESS boring than the new one? Am I missing something? The only really interesting things in the old codex were gift of chaos (fun, but generally not very effective), and arguably the crazed rule (sometimes amusing, but often just frustrating).

The new codex has cultists, the boon table, some neat new units, and tricks for fighting against the loyalists to name a few of it's better points. Sure, there are some things that one could count as a downgrade like cult troops needing a lord to unlock them as troops, (personally, I think it's a nice touch, but I can see why others may dislike it) but overall, I'd say it's much better than the old dex.

The boon table would be better to me if with two potential outcomes you didn't lose all your wargear and boon stats gained, losing a SC's wargear, or a kitted out chaos lord who suddenly is a DP doesn't help when he was more killy with gear.

I've beenw restling with this feeling myself. The new codex opened remarkably little in the way of fun, powerful builds, while taking a dump the size of a birthday cake on the old mainstays.

It's not a case of "They changed it, now it sucks!" as much as "They hardly changed it and yet it blows".

...They didn't really do a lot of damage to some of the old builds; you need a Khorne Lord with your Tzeentch Sorcerer to field your old Berzerker/Sorcerer list, so what? It's seventy points and $10 worth of inconvenience.

I'm finding my old Tzeentch-based footslogging shooty list is barely altered at all; and I'm enjoying the fact that it looks like some of the old useless units (Bikes, Noise Marines, and to a lesser extent Raptors) might actually be worth taking.

I also actually like the Heldrake, which seems to be a rare opinion, so I may be biased towards trying to find silver linings in the changes more than other people, though.

I was actually just speaking with my own club about this to get a feel for things. My issues are that my main Chaos army was based heavily on infiltration. The entire army was actually constructed around it. Oops. I know I know "Huron". But I don't care for him all that much and he still doesn't really give me back what I lost. The other army I ran was a Rhino rush with a landraider full of termies thrown in. My termies are illegal (have to arm swap 'em) and the whole rhino rush thing doesn't work as well in 6th. Especially since I would have to drop a lot of supporting units in favor of aerial defense of some sort which then no longer really compliments the rush theme.

I was looking at starting a whole new army by mixing and matching what I have with maybe a few new units thrown in, but this new dex really feels like they want you to play it at 2000pts with a double foc and alllies. Allies are cool at my club, but there are almost never any 2000pt games and the double FOC is a definite no go. It's possible I could still find a 1500 point list that I actually like but I'm struggling to do so. So half the club was ok with me using the 4th ed dex and half were ok as long as I didn't try to take any of the new units from the new dex (no warp talons, or flak havocs, etc.). That's a reasonable stance I think so I will probably use the 4th ed dex and my infiltration army, but dump one or two of my heavy support slots to pick up a defense line. That seems to be a good compramise for now. I will probably move on when the Dark Angels codex comes out anyway so it's just a temporary thing.

it feels like they took away the cheese that chaos depended on for their last codex and added different cheese, which chaos will have to depend on for the next several editions.

no more cheap princes with lash, now you have cheap lords with brand. Seriously every army will now include this wargear.

The FAQ sorted out the terminator weapon issue.

The FAQ sorted out the terminator weapon issue.

Ah! Thanks for that. I missed the FAQ completely. I'll go check that out. Maybe my problems are already solved. Fingers crossed! lol


EDIT:

OK, so the FAQ solved ... almost nothing for me. lol Good to see I don't have to arm swap my termies though!

The rules changed, and now you have to change your army a little bit. I don't see the problem. This isn't Magic, where the rules are the game. In 40k, the narrative is the game.

My CSM's old strategy of Plague Marine anvil, Lesser Daemon hammer doesn't work anymore. Hell, I can't even take "Plague Marines" with my lone Sorcerer anymore. That doesn't change the fact that I have a renegade Librarian leading a small fleet of traitors on a vengeance quest against the Tyranids. My army still exists and still works, but the specifics changed a little.

Over all, I see that armies that follow the fluff are rewarded, and weird hybrid lists don't work anymore. That's consistent with GW's vision of 40k.

Indeed. My list has always been almost entirely mono-Tzeentch, I haven't had to change anything.

I usually give people about 4 months to get with a change to a new codex, after that I'm rather insistant that they update or play with some other club.

There really is some great things in the new CSM 'dex. I'm a SM player, and I can say that my CSM list is far more lethal than my fairly stout SM list that I've been honing for years.

I really think that IF people could just crack open the CSM book and look at as a new army, not in comparrison to the previous 2 CSM codices, they'd see how incredibly solid the new book really is.

How about in comparison to the 3.0 codex? (no not the 3.5, the 3.0)

Somthing is wrong when I look at that old codex lying next to the newest, and still prefer the former.

The 3 was a pile of...gak is being polite. 4 was just beyond bland and pale compared to 3.5, which definitely had its faults (one unit should not need 4 pages for you to work out points costs, like you did with cult armies, and it exploited a lot of the 3rd/4th ed IC rules to create certain cheese combinations) but it was at least fun

This book has some RT feel to it (a D66 table!) and actually requires yu to show some dedication if you want cult troops, like 3.5, and we're back to being able to customise our lords again - about time. Annoying that khorne got dumped on again with the new book, and that the once Khorne gift of FNP is now in the hands of our worst enemy, and chosen can be made into better bezerkers than bezerkers...BUT i will happily build lists with this book


Some bits irk me - that a DP is only Ld9 despite have VotLW, meaning he was actualy Ld8 - not even an aspiring champion! Oblits not being fearless, despite not really being mortal any longer - that sort of thing

I like the new codex in every way bar 3
Daemon Princes being forced to become Marked. Not even that they can't take marks but that they MUST take it. You can have Undivided Princes. Lorgar and Perturabo are 2 and I am sure the Black Legion, Iron Warriors and Word Bearers have them,.

2 Berserkers nerfed with no new kits. In fact I would settle for a new sculpt.

The wargear layout, and the Armoury page. I dislike it. Its like going backwards. The Eldar, Daemons and Orks, and all 5th ed codexes have better layouts. Ecvery units is given an entry in full, with all wargear and points listed. None of this "May take a Kiklly Thing, refer to page X"
Page X- Killy hing, XXX pts, refer to page 1"

The rules changed, and now you have to change your army a little bit. I don't see the problem. This isn't Magic, where the rules are the game. In 40k, the narrative is the game.

That's just it though. Your quote isn't really universally true. While some people like AnomanderRake have found that their list is playable and requires very little in the way of change (Ironic when you consider his army is Tzeenchian ...) other armies have been rendered almost unplayable or at the least require major changes. My primary build is now literally no longer even possible while my secondary build requires a large enough amount of change that I feel it's almost more trouble than it's worth. The issue I have is the randomness of the whole thing. Some builds are almost comlpetely untouched while others are almost impossible to do and there appears to be no real rhyme or reason to it. And don't even get me started on the whole "you won a combat. Roll on this chart". You charged, role on this chart. You started a combat, role on that chart" nonsense. NO thank you. That part is obviously just my own personal taste and some will really enjoy doing that. I'm just not one of them.

As for doing new builds from scratch, I'm still trying to see if I can work out a build I think I will want to play, but so far I haven't been able to. I think it's possible the book just no longer suits my personal play style. That's why I haven't really liked it thus far.

No, what I wrote is universally true. You are referring to your models as "builds" rather than "armies". That's your first issue right there. Your armies still exist and function. Your builds do not.

"Some builds are almost comlpetely untouched while others are almost impossible to do and there appears to be no real rhyme or reason to it."

This is pure gold. The armies have changed to better reflect the narrative, but you can't see that so it looks random.

What are your armies, specifically? I bet you I can fix your lists.

Tycho wrote:
I was actually just speaking with my own club about this to get a feel for things. My issues are that my main Chaos army was based heavily on infiltration. The entire army was actually constructed around it. Oops. I know I know "Huron". But I don't care for him all that much and he still doesn't really give me back what I lost. The other army I ran was a Rhino rush with a landraider full of termies thrown in. My termies are illegal (have to arm swap 'em) and the whole rhino rush thing doesn't work as well in 6th. Especially since I would have to drop a lot of supporting units in favor of aerial defense of some sort which then no longer really compliments the rush theme.

I was looking at starting a whole new army by mixing and matching what I have with maybe a few new units thrown in, but this new dex really feels like they want you to play it at 2000pts with a double foc and alllies. Allies are cool at my club, but there are almost never any 2000pt games and the double FOC is a definite no go. It's possible I could still find a 1500 point list that I actually like but I'm struggling to do so. So half the club was ok with me using the 4th ed dex and half were ok as long as I didn't try to take any of the new units from the new dex (no warp talons, or flak havocs, etc.). That's a reasonable stance I think so I will probably use the 4th ed dex and my infiltration army, but dump one or two of my heavy support slots to pick up a defense line. That seems to be a good compramise for now. I will probably move on when the Dark Angels codex comes out anyway so it's just a temporary thing.

You look at the faq? termies are not limited to jusr one cc or ranged option now

This is pure gold. The armies have changed to better reflect the narrative, but you can't see that so it looks random.

No, they have NOT all been changed to better reflect the narrative. Alpha legion anyone? The only to play that right now is to take a character who isn't even IN the Alpha legion, or to hope for a random dice roll. Yes, SOME armies have been changed to better fit the narrative. I do agree with that point. Others have been inexplicably left out. It almost feels like they wanted to set it up so that playing a mono god got rewarded (and the mono lists to seem to be a bit more "fluffy" than previously), and everyone else kind of got whatever might have been left over.

What are your armies, specifically? I bet you I can fix your lists.

I would actually welcome that. I'm the only Chaos marine player in my area so it's sometimes hard to get a good second set of eyes that can help show where you are going wrong. If I have time this week I will post the list I'm having the biggest issue with (my primary list) and see what you think. I have no issue being proven wrong if you really can fix the list. I already mentioned that my second list can be tweaked but I don't really care for the way it comes out so I'm leaving that one alone. There's nothing inherently wrong with the way it comes out mind you. I just don't like it. Personal opinion there, not a comment on the dex. Anyway, yeah, if I get time I'll post the infiltrators list. Thanks!

EDIT: Actually the ONLY player. I'm just one of the only players who takes them as a regular army.

You look at the faq? termies are not limited to jusr one cc or ranged option now

lol read down just a few more posts from the one you quoted.

tycho wrote: lol read down just a few more posts from the one you quoted

You underestimate the burning desire people have to point out that someone else is wrong and how they have to stop down and do just that.

I almost posted the same thing but decided to read to see if anyone else beat me to it. They did. So, now I'm poking fun at someone else.

Hopefully, with the new look White Dwarf, they will give us articles on the Chaos forces that they haven't represented so well in the new Codex.

I haven't yet had a battle with the new codex, not much has changed in my force really and I can pretty much field the same as before. The only change is that I can't field my counts as Lucius in my Bezerkers anymore or my Tzeentch Sorcerer in with my Slaaneshi Raptors. No real biggy, will just have to make amendments to the fluff a little.

I do think they could have done better though and somethings haven't been thought out that well. It does appear to be an improvement on the last however.