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.

Experiment 626 wrote:

 Giganthrax wrote:

 MandalorynOranj wrote:
Why is it bad that each unit has a predetermined role?

By your argument, Eldar are equally boring and lazy because they basically only have squad leader upgrades outside of Guardians...

GW is probably aware of how stupid and unfluffy this is, so they try to cram forced mechanics such as the warp storm chart and random herald wargear to create an illusion that your army is chaotic, but IMHO it's bad design. Chaos Marines are an example of this philosophy done far better.

Or maybe, you simply don't get Daemons at all?

There's nothing 'lazy' about our unit designs. Notice that no actual Daemon players are whining about Kelly's supposedly lazy & crappy designs - just non-Daemon players who've never played with the army and don't understand how it really works.

"Unfluffly" would be to give 'oodles of options to every unit actually!

I'm a Daemon player (for the last few years), and I'm not a fan of the new Codex so far. It's not that the power level has been changed, (that doesn't bother me as long as I'm having a fun game), but that the entire army has changed.

I liked the 'all Deep Strike' requirement. I didn't mind the rolling for waves. Even before the WD update, I loved Daemons, how they played and how they looked.

What makes me sad is that the changes were so sweeping that the new codex basically said "we're removing Chaos Daemons from the game, and replacing it with another army that uses the same models and also happens to be called Chaos Daemons". Everything I loved about the way the army worked is gone.

Adding to that the stupidity of making almost all non-vehicle shooting psychic is making me seriously consider dropping Daemons. If I go with a shooty Tzeentch list and happen to play Eldar, I most likely won't be able to shoot. I've already seen what that can look like when playing against my son's Tyranids when I'm in range of Shadow of the Warp, I can only imagine how bad it'll be against an Eldar player and the effect covers the entire board, and causes perils more often as well. I went from having reliable, highly accurate fire, with outstanding AP values (although of lower volume) in Bolt of Tzeentch and Daemonic Gaze to having almost all of my shooting attacks subject to Deny the Witch and various other Psychic defenses.

In short, I'm not a fan of Phil Kelly

I miss the days when armies had rewards and punishments.

You can take "X" but lose "Y" kind of things.

I feel that the new Daemons should be rewarded for playing mono-god lists.

Maybe being able to add or subtract 1 from the Warpstorm table.

They are rewarded - only 1 result on the 4 god stomps will bother them now.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
They are rewarded - only 1 result on the 4 god stomps will bother them now.

But when it happens it affect the totality of your army, so it's not really a trade-off.

 Sephyr wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
They are rewarded - only 1 result on the 4 god stomps will bother them now.

But when it happens it affect the totality of your army, so it's not really a trade-off.

If by totality, you mean 1/6th.

Instruments can reroll those results, so you benefit a bit from having a non-mono army list.

 Sephyr wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
They are rewarded - only 1 result on the 4 god stomps will bother them now.

But when it happens it affect the totality of your army, so it's not really a trade-off.

The trade-off is that when your own God shows up, you will likely have a boatload of re-rolls to hit your opponent with.
So 1 'bad' result for mono-God armies, 2 average and 1 really, really good result.

The other main advantage for mono-god is that it comes out of reserves at warp-speed due to Instrument chaining, and is 100% accurate due to Icons.

Multi-god lists on the other hand only get partial benefits from Instruments/Icons.

I think the one thing everyone can agree on is that every writer is terrible. It's a shame really. I still think Kelly is the best of the lot, but he certainly has his flaws as well.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Mohoc wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

PredaKhaine wrote:
I feel sorry for Phil Kelly - he gets written off for not changing enough (csm) and for changing too much (CD)

Mat Ward writes codex's which are seen as powerful (necrons, grey knights etc) So he gets complained about.

Jeremy Vetock gets complained about for underpowering DA.

Win, lose or draw, we still complain.

To be fair, Ward writes books that aren't fun to play against and are really gimmicky, but are very powerful, and seems to be in charge of many of the cornerstone books. As such, they become the standard. When another book doesn't meet that standard, it becomes an issue in and of itself as well.

I mean, Necrons are a 5E book, and yet none of the 6E armies are as well adapted to the core game mechanics as Necrons are, which is an issue in and of itself.

I think you have a different issue going on here. Necrons were written for 6th Edition, but for a power level comparable to the top power level of 5th Edition before 6th Ed rules were finalized. Then, later they changed the power level of the newer books to tone down the game a little. As a result, Necrons are incredibly powerful in 6th Edition compared to every other army. Matt Wards gimmiks like MSS, Everliving, flying dedicated transports that protect cargo from damage and Quantum Shielding,do not help bringing the codex down to par with the newer codexes written for the new edition. Grey Knights have the same issue.

It's exactly those things that make it so well adapted to 6th. Flyer transports with rules that sidestep everything bad about being a flyer transport, AV13 shields mitigate much of the harshness of Hull Points because you remove almost all multishot weapons from harming or especially penetrating it (not to mention their basic transport gets an extra HP over all other tanks in the game but Land Raiders...just for gaks and giggles), MSS makes Challenges a joke, while NightFight plays more prominently than ever and no other army can manipulate and take advantage of that like Necrons, while Tesla Weapons hugely mitigate Snapshots turning basic Tesla Weapons into merely BS3 when Snapshotting on average and TL Tesla weapons generate an average hit rate comparable to a BS8 weapon when snapshotting, and Gauss weapons obviously are rather potent when joined with Hull Points.

Additionally, the assault units Necrons do have are actually some of those that got *better* with 6E (like Scarabs and the Beast unit type), particularly Scarabs and Wraiths, and were largely unaffected by the things that really killed other armies assault units like transport changes and assaulting from reserves.

It's not the raw power of the individual units, it's the way the entire book was seemingly written either to ignore what 6E was toning down for everyone (vehicles/hull points) else or take maximum advantage of other changes (snapshots, nightfight, flyers) on a fundamental level.

Could not have said it better.

Chaos players complaints about the latest CSM codex has nothing to do with the codex itself, more that the 3.5 ed CSM Codex was amazing, if a little confusing for options, 5th ed Codex GUTTED the CSM options, 6th ed but a fair few back and some new ones.

Its gone in the right direction which I applaud I mean after the 5th ed abomination of blandness the 6th ed book was FAR better than expected.

 DeffDred wrote:


Maybe being able to add or subtract 1 from the Warpstorm table.

Are you mad? The game is bogged down by (Kelly-) spam enough as it is. If anything, rewards should go to people who bring armies as diverse as possible to the table, avoiding repetition where-ever possible and work through a combination of different elements (assaulty Khorne leveraged by sorcery Tzeentch, fast-moving Slaanesh supporting an anchor of Nurgle, etc..).

 Vaktathi wrote:

Mohoc wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

PredaKhaine wrote:
I feel sorry for Phil Kelly - he gets written off for not changing enough (csm) and for changing too much (CD)

Mat Ward writes codex's which are seen as powerful (necrons, grey knights etc) So he gets complained about.

Jeremy Vetock gets complained about for underpowering DA.

Win, lose or draw, we still complain.

To be fair, Ward writes books that aren't fun to play against and are really gimmicky, but are very powerful, and seems to be in charge of many of the cornerstone books. As such, they become the standard. When another book doesn't meet that standard, it becomes an issue in and of itself as well.

I mean, Necrons are a 5E book, and yet none of the 6E armies are as well adapted to the core game mechanics as Necrons are, which is an issue in and of itself.

I think you have a different issue going on here. Necrons were written for 6th Edition, but for a power level comparable to the top power level of 5th Edition before 6th Ed rules were finalized. Then, later they changed the power level of the newer books to tone down the game a little. As a result, Necrons are incredibly powerful in 6th Edition compared to every other army. Matt Wards gimmiks like MSS, Everliving, flying dedicated transports that protect cargo from damage and Quantum Shielding,do not help bringing the codex down to par with the newer codexes written for the new edition. Grey Knights have the same issue.

It's exactly those things that make it so well adapted to 6th. Flyer transports with rules that sidestep everything bad about being a flyer transport, AV13 shields mitigate much of the harshness of Hull Points because you remove almost all multishot weapons from harming or especially penetrating it (not to mention their basic transport gets an extra HP over all other tanks in the game but Land Raiders...just for gaks and giggles), MSS makes Challenges a joke, while NightFight plays more prominently than ever and no other army can manipulate and take advantage of that like Necrons, while Tesla Weapons hugely mitigate Snapshots turning basic Tesla Weapons into merely BS3 when Snapshotting on average and TL Tesla weapons generate an average hit rate comparable to a BS8 weapon when snapshotting, and Gauss weapons obviously are rather potent when joined with Hull Points.

Additionally, the assault units Necrons do have are actually some of those that got *better* with 6E (like Scarabs and the Beast unit type), particularly Scarabs and Wraiths, and were largely unaffected by the things that really killed other armies assault units like transport changes and assaulting from reserves.

It's not the raw power of the individual units, it's the way the entire book was seemingly written either to ignore what 6E was toning down for everyone (vehicles/hull points) else or take maximum advantage of other changes (snapshots, nightfight, flyers) on a fundamental level.

To be Fair, The Ghost Ark has an extra hullpoint, probably because it's a lot more expensive than most transports.

 Sasori wrote:
To be Fair, The Ghost Ark has an extra hullpoint, probably because it's a lot more expensive than most transports.

The Wave Serpent would like a word...

 Sasori wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Mohoc wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

PredaKhaine wrote:
I feel sorry for Phil Kelly - he gets written off for not changing enough (csm) and for changing too much (CD)

Mat Ward writes codex's which are seen as powerful (necrons, grey knights etc) So he gets complained about.

Jeremy Vetock gets complained about for underpowering DA.

Win, lose or draw, we still complain.

To be fair, Ward writes books that aren't fun to play against and are really gimmicky, but are very powerful, and seems to be in charge of many of the cornerstone books. As such, they become the standard. When another book doesn't meet that standard, it becomes an issue in and of itself as well.

I mean, Necrons are a 5E book, and yet none of the 6E armies are as well adapted to the core game mechanics as Necrons are, which is an issue in and of itself.

I think you have a different issue going on here. Necrons were written for 6th Edition, but for a power level comparable to the top power level of 5th Edition before 6th Ed rules were finalized. Then, later they changed the power level of the newer books to tone down the game a little. As a result, Necrons are incredibly powerful in 6th Edition compared to every other army. Matt Wards gimmiks like MSS, Everliving, flying dedicated transports that protect cargo from damage and Quantum Shielding,do not help bringing the codex down to par with the newer codexes written for the new edition. Grey Knights have the same issue.

It's exactly those things that make it so well adapted to 6th. Flyer transports with rules that sidestep everything bad about being a flyer transport, AV13 shields mitigate much of the harshness of Hull Points because you remove almost all multishot weapons from harming or especially penetrating it (not to mention their basic transport gets an extra HP over all other tanks in the game but Land Raiders...just for gaks and giggles), MSS makes Challenges a joke, while NightFight plays more prominently than ever and no other army can manipulate and take advantage of that like Necrons, while Tesla Weapons hugely mitigate Snapshots turning basic Tesla Weapons into merely BS3 when Snapshotting on average and TL Tesla weapons generate an average hit rate comparable to a BS8 weapon when snapshotting, and Gauss weapons obviously are rather potent when joined with Hull Points.

Additionally, the assault units Necrons do have are actually some of those that got *better* with 6E (like Scarabs and the Beast unit type), particularly Scarabs and Wraiths, and were largely unaffected by the things that really killed other armies assault units like transport changes and assaulting from reserves.

It's not the raw power of the individual units, it's the way the entire book was seemingly written either to ignore what 6E was toning down for everyone (vehicles/hull points) else or take maximum advantage of other changes (snapshots, nightfight, flyers) on a fundamental level.

To be Fair, The Ghost Ark has an extra hullpoint, probably because it's a lot more expensive than most transports.

The Ghost Ark has a huge number of advantages over those other transports, the Imperial ones are AV11 or AV12/10 and can't get Jink saves or ignore terrain when moving, DE Raiders/Venoms are...paper, while Devilfish once kitted to be useable aren't much cheaper and Wave Serpents are generally more expensive. Nobody else gets AV13 shields, can't put out 20 shots a turn and engage two different targets, don't get to ignore shaken on a 2+ or stunned on a 4+, and can't regenerate models for scoring units. There's a reason it's expensive and it's hard to see where it needs to get an extra HP over everyone else (including stuff like Leman Russ tanks) just for that.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 DeffDred wrote:


Maybe being able to add or subtract 1 from the Warpstorm table.

Are you mad? The game is bogged down by (Kelly-) spam enough as it is. If anything, rewards should go to people who bring armies as diverse as possible to the table, avoiding repetition where-ever possible and work through a combination of different elements (assaulty Khorne leveraged by sorcery Tzeentch, fast-moving Slaanesh supporting an anchor of Nurgle, etc..).

Ugh, Khorne backed by sorcery. Just, ugh.

The rules should be setup so that a codex has enough internal balance so that certain units aren't effectively required choices. The same goes for the overall game rules and the meta that they encourage. Mono-god builds should have rules associated with them so that their weakness are somewhat (SOMEWHAT) alleviated should one choose a mono-god army. So all-Khorne would get some love on either shooting or avoiding shooting, Nurgle would get a little speed or DS love, Tzeentch might get some melee love and Slaanes would get some dirty nasty love (of some kind). That way a player could take the happy chaos family army with units from all the four, or they could to mono, and get a little help so that they'd be weak but not hopeless in one area.