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.

The fact our paper airplanes can now be be torn apart by the average weapon in the game for starters.

That's how it's always been though. They did better in 5th, I'll grant you, but it was the same way then...

Anything that potentially reduces Kaldor Draigo's Mary Stuism is great by me.

The thing with Kelly's codices is that he both soars the highest and crashes the hardest. His best works, the 4th edition Orks Codex and the 5th edition DE codex, are among the most well designed codices in the game. However, his bad codices tend to be really bad, with SW being in my opinion the most poorly designed codex of 5th and CSM being fine but disappointing. I have no knowledge of the Daemons book so I can't say for sure, but depending on whether heads or tails came up with Kelly's codex quality coin toss will have an impact on the attitude of dakka towards him.

I like kelly's daemon dex, having unexpected things happen is a plus for me.

Colonel Kreitz wrote:
I genuinely do not understand the DE hate here. I think that it may be the best codex GW has ever released. The units fit the theme, things are generally very well internally balanced, and the army works cohesively.

What's so awful about that?

I dont get how you can say that they are internally balanced. dark lances are crazily overpriced. The book has so many anti infantry platforms that mostly revolve around combat but the best one, by a mile is a dedicated transport people take as a firing platform. The book has tons of anti tank units, that mostly use shooting, that all miserably fail, while beasts and grotesques(and now wyches in 6th) kill vehicles hard.

Haemi ancients pay a huge price for an extra wound and attack.

Hellions cost as much as assault marines, epically bad. If you want to talk about internal balance how much more does an assault marine with a jump pack cost than a marine? Well a hellion is nearly twice the cost of a Kabalite warrior and basically gets some bogus rules and a jump pack.

Chaos space marine codex is a major fail and so boring......demons seems a bit better.

My chaos marines are all nicely packed away in the kr cases until it gets fixed.........I just hope Kelly doesn't get to write orks......no doubt it will be a random waaaaaagh table and looted wagons and flash gitz will be über competitive lol


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chaos space marine codex is a major fail and so boring......demons seems a bit better.

My chaos marines are all nicely packed away in the kr cases until it gets fixed.........I just hope Kelly doesn't get to write orks......no doubt it will be a random waaaaaagh table and looted wagons and flash gitz will be über competitive lol

People have opinions, but that isn't where the hate comes from. Its that everyone also has expectations. And when those are not met (reasonable or otherwise) somebody somewhere is going to complain about it, because everyone either has to play it, or play against it. If I played Necrons would I complain about the Mind Shackle Scarab. Hell, no. I'd put it in as many places as it can go. However, as I have only ever played against it, it ranks as the most unfun thing ever created.

I personally would rather play anything Kelly writes over anything Ward has written. Others will feel the opposite.

I like most of Kellys work. Even the praised Ork codex pissed me off when it was written. What the hell do you mean I can't take burnas in squads anymore? It totally messed up my KOS army. But 7 years later I've learned to accept the codex for what it is and move on.

You can't blame Kelly for 6th edition and what it did to his books that were produced before it. Even the idea that the book was written with "x" in mind is BS because it has to work in the edition we have now. Not what might be coming two years down the line. A prime example is Wyches. Perfectly viable and utilized in 5th. The total nerf bat that hit HTH in 6th and makes them useless now is not his fault.

A lot of the problem is short memories. There is very little in the current SW book that didn't exist in the old SW book. Old SW could take more than 2 HQs, hell, they were required to. They could always split fire their long fangs. Their characters were always really good at HTH. They got 1 new unit, and yeah, its good on the table (fluff is what fluff is). And just like in 3rd edition, the book plays to the strengths of the edition it was written in.

Give 'Crushers back theirnT5 and 3+ and I'd be unreservedly delighted.

As it is, even 4 days in, the interactions are so dense I don't think everything has been spotted yet..


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Although I have just had a chuckle at White Dwarf Daily featuring a massive conversion of Skulltaker on a chariot when the new codex has just invalidated the model!

Perhaps it's still an option in the Army book.

CSM codex is great, I really like it and I do look forward to ally with Daemons.

Purebred pedigree daemons however, as a primary force on their own has disappointed me greatly. Sure its all cheaper but its all so fragile. Against shooty lists you're in it deep, and wow are shooty lists everywhere. I still think its a crime that the go-to SW list is a big shootfest, whatever happened to feral close combatants? SW could be such a cool army if they weren't used like Tau

 Exergy wrote:

 Harriticus wrote:
I never was angry at kelly. The 5th ed. Dark Eldar Codex was the best codex GW has put out in quite a while.

what? The 6th edition DE codex is crap. So many broken units


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
From the sound of CSM players, they are just mad the new codex wasn't the auto-win the 3.5 edition apparently was.

That is 100% the reason behind their complaints.

not at all the reason behind my complaints


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:
The dark eldar codex is a master piece of a codex. All the units are good (Mandrakes who, i ain't heard of no mandrakes?) and the models are FANTASTIC.

Mandrakes
Archon Court
Hellions
Scourges
Cronos
Bloodbrides
Grotesques
Haemi Ancients
MANDRAKES

Hellions are pretty useful with Baron Combined he's there for a reason.

Usable units
HQ: 6.5/11 units usable
Archon, Succubus, Haemie, Duke, Baron, Drahzar, Vect in larger games

Elites: 5/7 usable, and mandrakes can still be used if they can 1st turn assault or if the decapitor was actually an IC which might get fixed
Trueborn, Incubi, Harlequins, Grotesques, Wracks

Troops: 2/2
Warriors and Wyches

Fast: 3/4
Reavers, Hellions, Beastpack

Heavy: 4/5
Talos, Voidraven, Razorwing, Ravager

Like the majority of the stuff are usable, they just need some synergy to use them very well.

 azreal13 wrote:
Give 'Crushers back theirnT5 and 3+ and I'd be unreservedly delighted.

As it is, even 4 days in, the interactions are so dense I don't think everything has been spotted yet...

'Crushers sucked hardcore in the last codex - Fatey was the only thing making them good because of his re-roll bubble.
But they were slow-as-pants infantry that were forced to Deep Strike into play, that the mass transporthammer of 5th tended to laugh at.

Now they can deploy normally, are proper cavalry who can finally chase crap down and they can help escort a kick-@$$ beatstick of a Herald. Plus get their own champ with another ap2 weapon!
Just avoid power fist/S8+ units with 2+ saves and they'll eat those nasty MEQ's units 'till they're too tired to even lift their Hellblades.

 Jayden63 wrote:


A lot of the problem is short memories. There is very little in the current SW book that didn't exist in the old SW book. Old SW could take more than 2 HQs, hell, they were required to. They could always split fire their long fangs. Their characters were always really good at HTH. They got 1 new unit, and yeah, its good on the table (fluff is what fluff is). And just like in 3rd edition, the book plays to the strengths of the edition it was written in.

These things aren't what honked people off. Long Fangs having split fire wasn't the issue, it was split fire on top of an extra heavy weapon and being 10-20% cheaper while they're at it, with Counterattack on top just for kicks. Nobody really cared about taking multiple HQ's, but rather that their HQ's were just more productive for the same number of points. It was about Grey Hunters having more wargear and better special rules and being overall more capable and costing fewer points than their equivalents.

Not, it wasn't short memories, there were some things that were really borked in that book and the flood of "counts-as" armies displayed it beautifully. I could run my old CSM list as an SW list, swapping out less than half a dozen squad models really, and have an almost identical army but with more special rules and abilities and about 120 extra points to play with

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Jayden63 wrote:


A lot of the problem is short memories. There is very little in the current SW book that didn't exist in the old SW book. Old SW could take more than 2 HQs, hell, they were required to. They could always split fire their long fangs. Their characters were always really good at HTH. They got 1 new unit, and yeah, its good on the table (fluff is what fluff is). And just like in 3rd edition, the book plays to the strengths of the edition it was written in.

These things aren't what honked people off. Long Fangs having split fire wasn't the issue, it was split fire on top of an extra heavy weapon and being 10-20% cheaper while they're at it, with Counterattack on top just for kicks. Nobody really cared about taking multiple HQ's, but rather that their HQ's were just more productive for the same number of points. It was about Grey Hunters having more wargear and better special rules and being overall more capable and costing fewer points than their equivalents.

Not, it wasn't short memories, there were some things that were really borked in that book and the flood of "counts-as" armies displayed it beautifully.

The fifth weapon was undexpected. The lower cost was not. You need to remember, this codex had to compete with IG. it was obvious that the 16 point marine was not working when compared to the 5 point guardsman. That and IG got so many toys that it really raised the bar so far for each codex that followed it to be competitive. Also the original long fang squad was never taken because they were grossly overcosted. 23ish additional points for the unit leader. Something like that. So in the natural case of the GW pendulium swing is it any wonder they ended up the way they did. The war gear on the GH squad was also not a surprise. They could always take extra specialize CCWs or plasma. So them having toys isn't a surprise. The 15 point price tag. yeah, a bit low, but again, competing with the undercosted stuff of IG almost necessitated it. However, if it was put out now, I bet you would see 16 point GH and 14 point BCs. Especially with CSM being 13 points.

Counter attack argument is bs. SW had always had counter attack. Its just in 3rd/4th edition it meant that your guys piled in, thus getting more hits. In 5th edition everybody in all armies piled in, thus giving them more hits. So counter attack was changed. Its also conditional and not automatic. Probably viewed as a trade off for not having combat squading or one of the other SM special albilties. The same was with Acute senses (of course now that ability is all but useless) but for every person opponent who complained that SW had these abilities there would be one SW player who screamed bloody murder if they were taken away because it was something that they had always had.

Again, its just another issue of what side of the fence your sitting on.

As for count-as armies. Blame GWs piss poor codex release schedule. 8 years between codex releases is almost criminal. If the 4th ed Chaos codex didn't suck balls. If DA, BT etc. had been updated anytime around 2008 you wouldn't have seen as much bandwagoning because they would be using an updated codex of their own, and not grabbing onto that which can be easily done count-as and Wysiwyg and is newer with the current release core rule set..

The fifth weapon was undexpected. The lower cost was not. You need to remember, this codex had to compete with IG. it was obvious that the 16 point marine was not working when compared to the 5 point guardsman. That and IG got so many toys that it really raised the bar so far for each codex that followed it to be competitive. Also the original long fang squad was never taken because they were grossly overcosted. 23ish additional points for the unit leader. Something like that. So in the natural case of the GW pendulium swing is it any wonder they ended up the way they did. The war gear on the GH squad was also not a surprise. They could always take extra specialize CCWs or plasma. So them having toys isn't a surprise. The 15 point price tag. yeah, a bit low, but again, competing with the undercosted stuff of IG almost necessitated it. However, if it was put out now, I bet you would see 16 point GH and 14 point BCs. Especially with CSM being 13 points.

First off, codex's aren't made to "compete" against a direct rival. Otherwise after necrons CSM would've been god-tier vs everything else. There is no excuse for trying to directly "compete" against another codex.

Two, they would still be 17-19 points, based on the CSM.

CSM is 13 points, add ccw and you have 15. +2 for special rules such as counter-attack, ATSKNF, and combat tactics (which is GENEROUS mind you), and they'd be about 17-19 points still.

As for count-as armies. Blame GWs piss poor codex release schedule. 8 years between codex releases is almost criminal. If the 4th ed Chaos codex didn't suck balls. If DA, BT etc. had been updated anytime around 2008 you wouldn't have seen as much bandwagoning because they would be using an updated codex of their own, and not grabbing onto that which can be easily done count-as and Wysiwyg and is newer with the current release core rule set..

You know who else was using Counts-as armies for Space Wolves?

C:SM and BA. It was just that much better at doing their job at shooting and being assault based. Those were released in the same edition.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


You know who else was using Counts-as armies for Space Wolves?

C:SM and BA. It was just that much better at doing their job at shooting and being assault based. Those were released in the same edition.

Of course C:SM was using it as count-as. It was the new MEQ hotness. Why pay 16 points for a tactical when you can pay 15 points for a GH? Sure you loose a LD, two bodies in vehicles, etc. Doesn't matter, you were the new MEQ hotness.

However, I have not seen a single BA count as SW army since the BA got their own codex. Never once. Truth be told, I've never seen another C:SM player use SW since the BA codex is even more so C:SM+1 than the SW codex could ever hope to be. I have yet to see a DA player go back to SW now they they have their own codex. Its just the old stuff that always gets used as count as. Now you might still have some World Eater players who use Count as with the SW codex because they feel that Khorne is no longer viable (I personally don't see it).

Experiment 626 wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Give 'Crushers back theirnT5 and 3+ and I'd be unreservedly delighted.

As it is, even 4 days in, the interactions are so dense I don't think everything has been spotted yet...

'Crushers sucked hardcore in the last codex - Fatey was the only thing making them good because of his re-roll bubble.
But they were slow-as-pants infantry that were forced to Deep Strike into play, that the mass transporthammer of 5th tended to laugh at.

Now they can deploy normally, are proper cavalry who can finally chase crap down and they can help escort a kick-@$$ beatstick of a Herald. Plus get their own champ with another ap2 weapon!
Just avoid power fist/S8+ units with 2+ saves and they'll eat those nasty MEQ's units 'till they're too tired to even lift their Hellblades.

Well I'm a noob daemon player, have been collecting models but haven't got a game ready force together yet (personal rule that unpainted units don't get any table time, keeps me on the conveyor) so this makes me feel better, as I'm collecting more on models I like than to construct a kick ass list, and I love Crushers. Just finished my first unit, and it's one of the best painted units I've ever done.

Relieved they're not as totally screwed as I thought (and I'm not just taking your word for it, I see the sense in your comments)

 GreyHamster wrote:
I feel like small things demonstrate that he and Cruddace either fail at games design, or just don't care. Ambiguities of wording continue to crop up, and the Burning Chariot demonstrates either a fundamental lack of understanding of the rules or a continued inability to evaluate costs with any degree of reasonable logic.

Cruddace is probably still getting in trouble for making imperial guard so damn awesome, he hasnt made anything on par or better since.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

First off, codex's aren't made to "compete" against a direct rival. Otherwise after necrons CSM would've been god-tier vs everything else. There is no excuse for trying to directly "compete" against another codex.

Two, they would still be 17-19 points, based on the CSM.

CSM is 13 points, add ccw and you have 15. +2 for special rules such as counter-attack, ATSKNF, and combat tactics (which is GENEROUS mind you), and they'd be about 17-19 points still.


You know who else was using Counts-as armies for Space Wolves?

C:SM and BA. It was just that much better at doing their job at shooting and being assault based. Those were released in the same edition.

First off, Space Wolves don't have Combat Tactics since running away is for women! (re: Ultrasmurfs)
Second, Space Wolves have almost always caused massive butthurt and been decried as the OP loyalist army because of the fact they play more like CSM's, but have all the inherent advantages of being loyalist marines.

Yes, Grey Hunters are a bit too cheap. But considering they were over-priced in their previous book, AND that GW decided as well that 16pts is likely too much for a Tactical Marine, then why should Grey Hunters be kept over-costed?
If 15pts worked for basic Chaos Marines who are the closest MEQ unit to Hunters, then it likely made sense to make GH's the same cost as well. (ATSKNF + Counter-Attack being considered about the equal of marks, plus the loss of Combat Tactics which can force the SW's to fight out hopeless battles they can only lose)

What likely made the situation worse was that Bloodclaws likely should have been costed at 14pts a pop to make them relevent against the more versitial Grey Hunters.

Likewise with Longfangs. They were one of the game's worst units before the Space Wolf update. Laughably overcosted, premium for their mandetory weapon upgrades AND 0 ablative bodies to keep said upgrades alive...
Sure 18 Longwang spam was a donkeycave's best friend, but it also wasn't nearly as impossible to combat as alot of people made it out to be. (DoA's & Daemons are actually a hienously effective hard-counter to it, same as anyone who can jet units 24"/turn)



And not every marine player ran "counts as SW's". I still saw lots of Vulkan lists and a decent smattering of Biker lists as well, on top of Kantor lists for "Deathwatch counts as" and Lysander buffed Sternguard...

And BA's only used the SW rules as mentioned until they finally got their own updated Codex, which I personally found far more infuriating to fight against due to shinanigans like army-wide FnP bubbles, Fast Razorbacks with cheaper turret upgrades, Blendernaughts, Fast outflanking Baal Preds, min/maxed Melta-spam Assault squads for Troops, Mephiston the infantry-daemon prince... (and my personal pet peeve, DoA's which made my Daemons look utterly incompitant!)


I've always thought the Kelly hate for SW's was overblown... Sure the army could be obnoxious, but it wasn't any worse than what IG or BA's or DE or Vulkan lists could run, and it got roflstomped by GK's in the end.

Codex diversity is good. Ability to field four viable factions is good. Codex Daemons is a good codex.

DE was a good codex. Space Wolves was a very good codex (so much so that all proxy armies by and large used it.) Codices which promote diversity and multi-builds are good.

Codex CSM was the exception to the rule, they could have gone for far more faction-specific rulesets, but inherently Death Legion are going to be the strongest due to game mechanics.

Phil Kelly is a good codex writer. Cruddace, on the other hand, really dropped the ball with DA. It remains to be seen what horrors the new wave of 6th shall bring.

For all those people complaining about warp storm chart, don't expect predictability when playing a faction called CHAOS.

However, I can't believe GW is still taking the idiotic approach of having one person write an entire codex. Is this some sort of Randist obsession? Codices should be released by a team, so they don't take ten years and can reign in the silly ideas of a single fantasist. (Ward)

Asmodai Asmodean wrote:

Phil Kelly is a good codex writer. Cruddace, on the other hand, really dropped the ball with DA. It remains to be seen what horrors the new wave of 6th shall bring.

Yeah, I think the worst mistake Cruddance made in Codex: DA was spelling his name as "Jeremy Vetock" on the credits page.

I'm not particularly mad at Phil Kelly for the Daemons book, but I no longer regard him as being much of a talent either. These days, Matt Ward and Robin Cruddance are both better at Codex design than Phil Kelly is. Say what you will about Matt Ward, but people really seem to enjoy playing the armies that he designs. Cruddance makes some serious mistakes, but GW also hands him the most difficult of Codices to write. Nids and Guard have more units than any other army in 40k, and while he could do a better job at internal balance, he usually has to account for twice as many units as your average Marine 'Dex writer. If you strip out all of the really bad stuff from the IG Codex, you still have a full "regular" codex of content that ranges from really good to playable.

Jayden63 wrote:

The fifth weapon was undexpected. The lower cost was not. You need to remember, this codex had to compete with IG. it was obvious that the 16 point marine was not working when compared to the 5 point guardsman.

GW doesn't design their codex's in that method, and the SW book would already have been done by the time of the IG release, with no time to go back and "update" it given the 6 months window they usually have between finishing the book and it being sent to graphics, printing, shipping, etc.

Additionally, 5pt guardsmen are not what makes that book strong, nor what you'd base a comparison on. They also were released only a year after C:SM was, with only C:IG intervening. C:IG in and of itself wasn't the great paradigm shift it was meant out to be, it was the combination of Vulkan Melta+TH/SS, IG and Space Wolves that really completely transformed the game.

That and IG got so many toys that it really raised the bar so far for each codex that followed it to be competitive.

I won't argue that, but that's a Cruddace book not a Kelly book and there's a lot more gak in the IG book than Kelly's SW book, much of the new stuff still never sees tables (e.g. Deathstrikes, Penal Legion, etc)

Also the original long fang squad was never taken because they were grossly overcosted.

I won't argue that. That doesn't mean 140pts for 5 split fire BS4 T4 3+sv Ld9 Krak Missiles in a 6 man unit was reasonable however, and that's why you almost never see SW armies (at least all through 5th) without that Long Fang unit. Not even IG have a unit throwing out firepower like that for those points, and certainly not anywhere near as resilient, the Vendetta being the nearest thing.

The war gear on the GH squad was also not a surprise. They could always take extra specialize CCWs or plasma. So them having toys isn't a surprise.

It was being able to take it all and being cheaper than everyone else.

The 15 point price tag. yeah, a bit low, but again, competing with the undercosted stuff of IG almost necessitated it.

Again, that's not really how GW designs their books, certainly not as fast as the following release, and making that change in reaction to *guardsmen* is probably the worst game design paradigm I could possibly think of. You don't cost a generalist heavy infantry unit that can match or even outfight many specialist CC Units and shoot as well as any basic troop to the same standard you cost weeny horde infantry that rely overwhelmingly on shooting. That's silly.

Even now, a comparable CSM is 18pts with VotLW, MoK and extra CCW (sporting Rage instead of ATSKNF) and doesn't get a discount on unit leaders with discounted upgrade weapons.

Counter attack argument is bs. SW had always had counter attack. Its just in 3rd/4th edition it meant that your guys piled in, thus getting more hits. In 5th edition everybody in all armies piled in, thus giving them more hits. So counter attack was changed.

Making it significantly more powerful, especially in conjunction with Über-grit which previously did not allow them to get bonus charge attacks and increased their CC killing power by 50% when combined with Counterattack.

The argument is not bs by any means because it turned GH's into a unit that could shoot as well as any equivalent, fight as well or better than equivalents, and hit back as hard or harder than equivalents even when charged, for fewer points, often significantly fewer. There was simply no way to gain the upper hand against them with an equivalent unit. And that's why SW's became *the* bandwagon army, why there were more SW armies than any other codex at Adepticon 2011 and nearly 90% of them were "counts-as".

Its also conditional and not automatic.

Ld9 goes off 5/6th of the time, I can count on one hand the number of times I saw it fail, and in that case the SW's were usually merely on par with their charging opponent.

Probably viewed as a trade off for not having combat squading or one of the other SM special albilties. The same was with Acute senses (of course now that ability is all but useless) but for every person opponent who complained that SW had these abilities there would be one SW player who screamed bloody murder if they were taken away because it was something that they had always had.

The problem (aside from the conceptual sillyness of CA and AS basically just making them "Marines...but BETTER") was that they didn't pay points for any of these abilities and were often in fact cheaper and more capable. Very few people would take Combat Tactics and Combat Squads over Übergrit and Counterattack, much less for a premium, and that showed. One will notice that BA's and DA's and CSM's, and succeeding MEQ books, still really don't have as cost effective fire support and basic troop units.

As for count-as armies. Blame GWs piss poor codex release schedule. 8 years between codex releases is almost criminal. If the 4th ed Chaos codex didn't suck balls. If DA, BT etc. had been updated anytime around 2008 you wouldn't have seen as much bandwagoning because they would be using an updated codex of their own, and not grabbing onto that which can be easily done count-as and Wysiwyg and is newer with the current release core rule set..

I won't deny that GW's codex schedule sucks balls, but basically any marine army not married to a niche build could be built with Space Wolves and built better for a long time, not just 4E books.

This is on top of the fact that the most successful SW builds ran more like Tau, Imperial Guard or Iron Warriors armies, with lots of armor and long ranged heavy anti-tank guns, than a Space Viking army.


Kelly has made some solid books, I personally liked the DE book before 6E and the changes to Assaults and the stupid concept of Hull Points gutted it. But no, Space Wolves were a rather borked codex that were poorly balanced and emphasized a style of play heavily contradictory to its theme.

Poor kelly. It's like they draw straws for who is to blame for each dex. If you look into the credits for each dex, every one of them is credited somewhere in there. I don't think kelly, ward, cruddace, or any designer actually writes a dex by himself, but they each work through it and one is credited for it (most likely the one who puts in the most work, but hey they could draw straws)

The CSM 'dex wasn't bad. My buddy who plays them loves it and does exceptionally well with them. And you have an I Win button or two built in (noisemarines and helldrake anyone?) For the most part the dex is balanced, as is the DA dex and the new Demon dex. If things keep up, all codecies will end up this way.

He could be Matt Ward.

Paitryn wrote:
Poor kelly. It's like they draw straws for who is to blame for each dex. If you look into the credits for each dex, every one of them is credited somewhere in there. I don't think kelly, ward, cruddace, or any designer actually writes a dex by himself, but they each work through it and one is credited for it (most likely the one who puts in the most work, but hey they could draw straws)

The CSM 'dex wasn't bad. My buddy who plays them loves it and does exceptionally well with them. And you have an I Win button or two built in (noisemarines and helldrake anyone?) For the most part the dex is balanced, as is the DA dex and the new Demon dex. If things keep up, all codecies will end up this way.

The issues weren't really with the power of the book. The problem is that it left the majority of the thematic/fluff problems of the previous book intact, still relegates Tzeentch to the "keep on the shelf" pile, and largely still feels like "Chaos Shareware" or "Codex: Chaos Lite". Much of the bad units are still bad (Defilers, despite being considered mediocre at best previously, somehow merited a 33% *increase* in cost while its much better armored and otherwise identical Soul Grinder counterpart in the Daemon book is 60pts cheaper...), the fluff is still rather weak, and overall it's not particularly imaginative.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Kelly also still has his major issue of "Must have vs OH GOD ITS HORRIBLE."

There's like no middle ground in his codex. There's good, and then there's Horrible.

I disagree actually. I've not seen a single thing in the new daemon book, that I genuinely would never think to use.

Well...Except fateweaver, because man that guy got hit so hard.xD

 DarknessEternal wrote:

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
From the sound of CSM players, they are just mad the new codex wasn't the auto-win the 3.5 edition apparently was.

That is 100% the reason behind their complaints.

3.5 wasn't auto-win.

 Evileyes wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Kelly also still has his major issue of "Must have vs OH GOD ITS HORRIBLE."

There's like no middle ground in his codex. There's good, and then there's Horrible.

I disagree actually. I've not seen a single thing in the new daemon book, that I genuinely would never think to use.

Well...Except fateweaver, because man that guy got hit so hard.xD

Bloodcrushers got a heavy nerf to the point of worthlessness.

Fiends..It will depend whether or not that -1 psyker aura is based on "Unit" vs "Model"

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
From the sound of CSM players, they are just mad the new codex wasn't the auto-win the 3.5 edition apparently was.

That is 100% the reason behind their complaints.

3.5 wasn't auto-win.

It nearly was.. It was so bad, convoluted and pretentious, most opponents would simply quit 40K forever in despair if you placed the book on the table .

It's probably the single biggest reason Warmachine and LoTR were getting so popular 2002 forward. The flood of 40K players fleeing this atrocity was mind-staggering.

Yeah except that it wasn't. It wasn't balanced - no book where the writer buffs his fav army and screws over 1KSons could ever be balanced - but it was no where near as bad as DarknessEternal seems to think it was.

It was certainly more Chaotic than the Codex that followed it (the current 6th Ed Codex that is).