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.

But why would you even take heldrakes?

Makumba wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


As can any Chaos army, in that case.

yes , but that would mean you actualy get to play double foc games. most games here cap at 1999 points . and then the imperial armies have 2-3 flyer and chaos can technicly take 3 drakes , but then it lacks in troops and long range support.

How is that different from any of the Imperial armies getting 6 Vendettas? That'd require double FOC as well.

IG can have a lot of vendettas if you play double FOC

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Makumba wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


As can any Chaos army, in that case.

yes , but that would mean you actualy get to play double foc games. most games here cap at 1999 points . and then the imperial armies have 2-3 flyer and chaos can technicly take 3 drakes , but then it lacks in troops and long range support.

How is that different from any of the Imperial armies getting 6 Vendettas? That'd require double FOC as well.

IG can take 9 vendettas on a single FOC. They come in squadrons of 3 for less points.

IG can take 18 vendetttas or valkyries if its double FOC

I take back what I said about the Daemon Prince. After doing some dice rolling and playing out some different senarios the Daemon Prince appears to be touger than he was before, and alot faster as well.

has someone used the forgefiend? Can it kill stuff?

DPs were extremely undercosted in the last codex. They are more in line with most FMCs in the game now.
They are good, but not auto-take units. I've seen them used to good effect, and their best when kept fairly cheap.

 Zweischneid wrote:
Still probably in the lowest third of 40K Codexes as far as the overall line goes.

I disagree with this statement. Putting the new CSM codex on line with Tau, BT, or SoB is not accurate at all. CSM is a much better codex than those.

CSM is better than some other mid-teir codexes like Eldar or Orks. Those are mono-build or dual-build codex's that can only be played on one way. CSM has a number of different builds that are all equally viable.

While its not top-teir, I expect that you will see a fair showing of CSM in major tourneys.

 illuknisaa wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Makumba wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


As can any Chaos army, in that case.

yes , but that would mean you actualy get to play double foc games. most games here cap at 1999 points . and then the imperial armies have 2-3 flyer and chaos can technicly take 3 drakes , but then it lacks in troops and long range support.

How is that different from any of the Imperial armies getting 6 Vendettas? That'd require double FOC as well.

IG can take 9 vendettas on a single FOC. They come in squadrons of 3 for less points.

And allied Imperial armies only get access to one squadron, hence my statement that any Imperial army, as well as Chaos and anyone else who can ally with IG, can get 6 Vendettas in a double FOC game. Imperial =/= Imperial Guard.

I thought you only can take one fast attack choice from an ally even that it is double FOC

 labmouse42 wrote:

CSM has a number of different builds that are all equally viable.

And these builds are...??? Please enlighten me, because over here, CSM=mono-Nurgle every f***ing time. Note. with "equally viable", I don't think about "equally crappy".

I would put the new CSM book around the power level of Tau, C:SM, 'nids and Eldar, but above BT, non-DW DA and SoB. it is just a painfully Mediocre codex with zero flavor and a goodkick for "one list that rules them all".

 Tomten wrote:
I thought you only can take one fast attack choice from an ally even that it is double FOC

You were wrong then.

So the ally FOC is doubled too? awesome

 AtoMaki wrote:
And these builds are...??? Please enlighten me, because over here, CSM=mono-Nurgle every f***ing time. Note. with "equally viable",

Here are 3 army concepts that you could build. This is just from thinking for a few minutes. You could make many more. Just because you think they suck does not mean they do.

Fast Assault Army
- 30 bikes, lord on bike, sorc on bike
- 3 maulerfields
- Havoc support as needed, with a rhino or two for dirge casters
This army is on your face on turn 2. You have one turn to shoot at the army before they assault you, and they are durable enough to get into the assault.

Daemon Allies
- Two squads of CSM/Cultists
- Flamer, Screamer Allies
- Havocs in bastion


Well Rounded Army
- Two squads of CSM
- Squad of PM
- Abbadon + terminators is LR
- Nurgle spawn
This is an army that my friend at the FLGS has been playing, and hes done very well with it.

 AtoMaki wrote:
I would put the new CSM book around the power level of Tau, C:SM, 'nids and Eldar, but above BT, non-DW DA and SoB. it is just a painfully Mediocre codex with zero flavor and a goodkick for "one list that rules them all".

Were all welcome to our own opinions. Time will tell.

 labmouse42 wrote:
Here are 3 army concepts that you could build. This is just from thinking for a few minutes. You could make many more. Just because you think they suck does not mean they do.

I don't think they suck. I kinda' know it from experience . We have 4 CSM players here (including me), so we have already went through like, all the combos the codex could offer (even crazy ones, like the no-MEQ build) and they all fell flat (except the mono-nurgle). And if you look through the lists you presented, then you will see that they are Mono-Nurgle too, with a little extra:
- Bikers are best with MoN, your troops will be probably PMs (you already has a Lord who will have MoN), and sooner or later, you will end up with MoN Obliterators instead of Havocs (and no Maulerfiends, since they are HS).
- With Daemon allies, you will just take Mono-Tzeentch Daemons to your Mono-Nurgle army...
- Tell your friend that if he would swap the CSM for more PM, then he would do much better .

Over here, we also tried the Chosenwing, and for a small time, it looked really good. But then, its player entered a tourney and got his face wiped by... two Mono-Nurgle CSM lists ...

 AtoMaki wrote:
I don't think they suck. I kinda' know it from experience .

Ok, I grant that you tried them, but that does not mean they are unplayable.

I played C:SM bikes for most of 5th edition. The bike list I started with changed dramatically over time, as I learned what was good. Even at the tail end of 5th, I won more tourneys with my bikes than with my Mech'dar because I knew the bikes so well. I knew how to play them to great effect, so even when playing GK I did better though I was at a significant disadvantage.

Where I am going with this -- Some army styles take time to learn and get good at. It does not make them bad, it just means they have a high learning curve.

 AtoMaki wrote:
We have 4 CSM players here (including me), so we have already went through like, all the combos the codex could offer (even crazy ones, like the no-MEQ build) and they all fell flat (except the mono-nurgle)

How did the assault one fall flat? Were you shot off the board on turn 1? What army (armies) did you try it against?

Really? Noise marines fell flat? On paper they look like they would be excellent for mid-board control. Not as good a PMs (which is what I'm using) but I am suprised you found them failing. Was it the lack of PG/MGs?

I also think that we have a different definition of mono-build. A mono-build list means that only one style can be brought. An example of this is orks. You bring lots of shootas, some lootas/dakka jets and maybe some MANZ/Bikers. Every build is like that. Compare it to GK with have henchmen builds, purifier builds, razorspam builds, etc.
MoN does not define mono-build. Bikes with MoN are a different list than PM spam. Another build is an epdi build.
Each build has a dramatically different playstyle than the others. That's the key. I have the feeling we were arguing "Oranges are orange" "No, apples are red" We should define what were discussing first, right?

 AtoMaki wrote:
- Bikers are best with MoN, your troops will be probably PMs

I ran a detailed analysis of bikes vs spawn here. In my analysis I found that MoN bikes were better, but normal bikes still performed well. Even Khorne bikes can do well, provided they only have one turn to be shot at.
http://the11thcompany.freeforums.org/bikes-or-spawn-t4376.html

 AtoMaki wrote:
(you already has a Lord who will have MoN), and sooner or later, you will end up with MoN Obliterators instead of Havocs .

Why not Havocs? I played a lot of SW, and found great effect with long fangs in bastions. ACs are better than MLs in 6th. These havocs are great vs flyers, ground targets, anything really. Why bring oblits over it?

 AtoMaki wrote:
Tell your friend that if he would swap the CSM for more PM, then he would do much better .

I am lucky enough to have Alex Finnell play at my FLGS. (thats his list). I believe he won Nova this past year. He knows what he's doing. Now Ill grant you that the guy could probably win tourneys with nothing but grots.

PS : Thanks for making a rational discussion instead of a flame fest. Its often hard to find.

 labmouse42 wrote:
Ok, I grant that you tried them, but that does not mean they are unplayable.

Actually, I didn't try them all (only Chosenwing, Daemon Machine Spam, Renegade Battle Company and Mono-Khorne), but in our local gaming club, we have a huge 40k brainstorm meeting every week, and these meetings provide a big pool of experience for me (we have 15-20 players, most of them with different armies/play styles). So the sentence was said by the CSM players: Mono-Nurgle=cool, everything else='bleh' - or at least in a competitive environment, as ours is pretty darn competitive (typical fun game here: Hybrid Wraithwing/CronAir vs. Min/Maxed IG Gunline) .

 labmouse42 wrote:
Really? Noise marines fell flat? On paper they look like they would be excellent for mid-board control. Not as good a PMs (which is what I'm using) but I am suprised you found them failing. Was it the lack of PG/MGs?

The problem with Noise Marines is that they are MEQ-s with a better gun. And since everyone and their kittens are gearing against MEQs... Yeah, their survivability rate is terrifying in comparsion of their points cost and damage output (the last is pretty good for NMs, but it will just make them a huge fire magnet).

 labmouse42 wrote:

Each build has a dramatically different playstyle than the others. That's the key. I have the feeling we were arguing "Oranges are orange" "No, apples are red" We should define what were discussing first, right?

Well, I would say: "Nurgle Is The Only Way". And problem is, since you take Nurgle, it is pretty clear in the codex that what units you should bring:
- Lord (on bike, with MoN)
- Sorcerer (Undivided)
- PMs
- Bikes (with MoN)
- Baledrakes
- Obliterators (with MoN)
- Havocs
When you specialize on a number of these units (say, you take more Bikers, and no Baledrakes), then you won't break the list, only shuffle it in one direction or another. The overall playstile won't change: PMs will still hold the objectives, Bikes will still apply the pressure, Obliterators will still blow sh*t up, etc.
But on the greater scale, it is damn hard to break this with including other options/units: they are just simply not cost-effective compared to the "integral" list units, they offer no synergy or they are out-of-place in the army. And when you would say "Screw it, I won't take any of the units above!" then you have to realize that you are losing efficiency.
So that's how I would define mono-build: it is not that you have only one actual army list (that is an extreme end on the slide, mostly represented by Chaos Daemons) but you have one army configuration what is just simply superior to the rest of the codex (typicial codex that suffers from the same: Imperial Guard). "Fortunately" to the CSM codex, the difference betwen the optimal setup and the "fun bin" is actually pretty slim within the codex, but you will feel the difference against any other big-player codex other than the ones I listed as the "same level" (SM, Tau, Eldar, 'nids).

 labmouse42 wrote:
Why not Havocs? I played a lot of SW, and found great effect with long fangs in bastions. ACs are better than MLs in 6th. These havocs are great vs flyers, ground targets, anything really. Why bring oblits over it?

One word: versatility. Oblis can just fulfill such a wide variety of roles that it is insane. Havocs can usually do one thing (depending on ther heavy weapons), but I must admit, they do have a role as cheap heavy weapon platforms.

 labmouse42 wrote:
I am lucky enough to have Alex Finnell play at my FLGS. (thats his list). I believe he won Nova this past year. He knows what he's doing. Now Ill grant you that the guy could probably win tourneys with nothing but grots.

Oh yes, I try to not count player experience in this arguement. A top-notch player who plays Mono-Khorne since his birth would probably do pretty well with it, even though we think that it is the weakest list in the codex (even no-MEQ was better!). But problem is, that not every player plays Mono-Khorne since his birth - most of them abbadon underpowered units for better ones quickly (and will end up with the Mono-Nurgle army I listed above).

Really? Noise marines fell flat? On paper they look like they would be excellent for mid-board control. Not as good a PMs (which is what I'm using) but I am suprised you found them failing. Was it the lack of PG/MGs?

Mono-slaanesh player here, they do Abysmal against most things due to several issues:

1: You will be either shooty, or ccw due to some odd decision to prohibit ccw + sonics.

2: Sonic guns aren't good enough to base squads around. You are paying 20 points for S4/AP5 with some cover save denial with Salvo without a major increase in effectiveness (You don't do much more against 4+ saves and better), while having no increase of effective survivability.

3: FNP for about 30 points, which can be sniped. However it also raises a unit of 10's cost by 3 points each. With additional Sonic that is 23 points, you are one less then Nurgle, but you don't have T5 or Poison or access to weaponry that is as generalized mid-board control such as melta or plasma, and you aren't T5 with poison, so you'll fare far worse in melee.

4: Doom siren is the best part of the package.

5: Making the Sonic Guns Salvo was a complete and utter joke. The enemy can attempt to kite you with standard rapidfire weapons due to 24" range compared to you. Making your mid-board control weaker.

6: Blastmaster is 30 points and requires 10 models, enough said.

7: Slaanesh Mark for a Lord the same cost as a Nurgle Mark

Best thing I can say about Noise Marines? I can now run them cheaper when I run them for melee, which seems to be their most effective use I've found, alongside doomsiren, because I have no way of actually getting them into effective combat however, they still aren't that great (No assault vehicles for chaos!)

Slaanesh marks for the rest of the stuff is worthless. I do not understand why Kelly didn't individualize marks for specific units, why would anyone take it on Obliterators?

 AtoMaki wrote:
Actually, I didn't try them all (only Chosenwing, Daemon Machine Spam, Renegade Battle Company and Mono-Khorne),

I don't think those builds can really pull it out. Chosenwing sounds good, but sticking a PG on every model really starts to fall flat. The PG chosen models are to fragile for 33 points each.

 AtoMaki wrote:
ours is pretty darn competitive (typical fun game here: Hybrid Wraithwing/CronAir vs. Min/Maxed IG Gunline) .

Those are the best to play in.

I've not been seeing as many MEQ per-say, as anti infantry. This could be because we have a lot of daemon players here who don't give a rats tail about AP2 weapons. As such, massive bolters are doing better, and which is why I've been bringing more bolters.

 AtoMaki wrote:
The problem with Noise Marines is that they are MEQ-s with a better gun. And since everyone and their kittens are gearing against MEQs...

I was thinking of taking bolters on every model save for the blastmaster. Keep the cost to 17 points a model for fearless CSM with an extra CCW. The focus would be mid-board control.

 AtoMaki wrote:
Well, I would say: "Nurgle Is The Only Way". And problem is, since you take Nurgle, it is pretty clear in the codex that what units you should bring:
- Lord (on bike, with MoN)
- Sorcerer (Undivided)
- PMs
- Bikes (with MoN)
- Baledrakes
- Obliterators (with MoN)
- Havocs

Don't forget Spawn.
I've also seen DPs used to good effect when given a black mace. (Again the goal is to keep the cost cheap)
Zombies are also good
LRs also are good in today's meta with Melta guns fading. This gives you an assault platform.
Abbadon makes a good beatstick if you want to go that route.
Typhus is a good choice for nurgle lists.

Now compare that list with whats good in eldar.
- Eldrad
- Harlequins.
- Pheonix Lord (for 2+ save)
- Fire Dragons
- Avatar
- Support platforms.
So the CSM has more good units to choose from.

Furthermore you say that you only shuffle the list, but won't shuffling change the focus? For exampke, I'm currently playing a list with 50 PMs, and I focus on mid-board control. I use rhinos to advance to mid-board by turn 2, and provide extra protection from daemon flamers on the turn they deep strike. Then I deploy and just squat on the middle of the board. Thus far this has proven well, though I expect to make some tweaks.

Believe it or not, I'm actually assaulting about 1/3 to 1/2 of the games. Ill drive a dirge caster rhino 18" to a squad of sternguard, then assault them with the PM.

As I mentioned we see a lot of daemons. Usually the daemon lets me go first, and I deploy the rhinos around the PMs in a circle. This gives a high risk of mishapping if they try and flame on the turn they land. That's why I take a lot of bolters as well. Finally, Ill use a dirge caster to assault a squad of flamers when possible, as I have found 10 PMs will win out over flamers, though it will take a few turns for them to kill 9 flamers.

I've not used bikes or oblits in this. Were I to, the entire playstyle would change.

I've also dropped edidemius and 10 plague bearers into the list in some games, and found that it changes the whole dynamic. Halfway through the game, my opponent is focusing everything he has on this squad on the other side of the board, because my PMs have become crazy. This helps me to grab objectives, etc until epi dies. Some armies can't even kill him. An example is my friend who plays orks. Ill hide epi behind ruins or at max range, and he is forced try try and run his lootas up or push his MANZ to them.

 AtoMaki wrote:
"Fortunately" to the CSM codex, the difference betwen the optimal setup and the "fun bin" is actually pretty slim within the codex, but you will feel the difference against any other big-player codex other than the ones I listed as the "same level" (SM, Tau, Eldar, 'nids).

You make a solid case, yet I have not been swayed. I still think that the CSM is more on line with the SW or BA codex. Its good, but not on the same level as CD/GK/IG. We of course, are both welcome to our opinons

 AtoMaki wrote:
Oblis can just fulfill such a wide variety of roles that it is insane. Havocs can usually do one thing (depending on ther heavy weapons), but I must admit, they do have a role as cheap heavy weapon platforms.

I guess that's a difference of playstyle. I would rather throw down 8 AC shots per squad downfield than 2 LC/PC shots. A lot of it also is on the meta that we are each seeing.

 AtoMaki wrote:
Oh yes, I try to not count player experience in this arguement. A top-notch player who plays Mono-Khorne since his birth would probably do pretty well with it

Granted, but my point was that he did not go directly to mono-nurgle. He has a lot of nurgle, but for his CSM objective holders he used non-marked CSM. Why? My thought is that if your going to be camping, you might as well spend 13 points on a bullet catcher than 24.

Edit : Off topic, but have you ever noticed how the best players in the US bring and win with what we would call 'horrible lists'. Take Mike Brandt. He wins with things that you would not expect. Why is it that all this theory hammer seems to not count in those levels?

 labmouse42 wrote:

Furthermore you say that you only shuffle the list, but won't shuffling change the focus?

Not neccessarly. The list itself still plays the same, with the change that you will be better with something at the cost of something else (say you take Obliterators instead of Bikes, then you will have more ranged firepower at the cost of losing manauverability). As I said before, just because you mix and match the units differently, the playstyle won't change that much. Especially since some of the units in the list does the same (Havocs/Obliterators, Bikers/Helldrakes).

We call it Mono-Nurgle because Nurgle rules the field bar some exceptions (Undivided Sorcerer, Undivided Havocs). That sounds pretty Mono-Nurgle for me ....

Oh, and I don't think that your comparsion with the Eldar codex is good. I mean, I said that the CSM is at the level of the Eldar, and the Eldar is far from the best codex in the game . A better comparsion would be the Ork codex, I guess it probably has the same ration of bad units/decent units/good units only that unlike in the CSM codex, some of the 'good units' are dead-crazy-good.

Edit : Off topic, but have you ever noticed how the best players in the US bring and win with what we would call 'horrible lists'. Take Mike Brandt. He wins with things that you would not expect. Why is it that all this theory hammer seems to not count in those levels?

Man, you can't even imagine how unbelievable this is for us, hungarian guys . We blame the player experience .

OMG page 3 of a dakka discussion actually turned into something extremely informative. Thanks guys for the good tips. I haven't been able to play my CSM with the new book yet so it is nice to see some things that work vs things that don't.

As far as the book goes I find the only thing I don't like about it is having to flip back and forth constantly when list making. I wish that it was layed out more like the C:SM with the options and point values in the unit entry. I do see why they did it this way though as it would get a bit redundant.

So the CSM has more good units to choose from.

ok , but having more good units to choose from then a 2 editions old codex, isnt much of a win . also if someone wants to play legion then the number of actual options are lower . compare them to SW .

do the new chaos models look good?