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.

 welshhoppo wrote:
Seems like a fun codex to be totally honest. It may not be as competitive as the Tau/Eldar/Overpowered Cheesedex. But nothing should be as powerful as those things anyway.

I fail to see how less units, less options, less chance of winning = fun.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:
Seems like a fun codex to be totally honest. It may not be as competitive as the Tau/Eldar/Overpowered Cheesedex. But nothing should be as powerful as those things anyway.

I fail to see how less units, less options, less chance of winning = fun.

I apologise, I meant fun in the Dwarf Fortress type of way.

Does everybody here play WAAC? Does everyone here play only tournament settings and only the most optimized and maximized lists? If that's the case then go ahead and be upset about the book. If you play this game for the fun and flavor of the army then this book still provides you with some cool options to have fun.

 Icculus wrote:
Does everybody here play WAAC? Does everyone here play only tournament settings and only the most optimized and maximized lists? If that's the case then go ahead and be upset about the book. If you play this game for the fun and flavor of the army then this book still provides you with some cool options to have fun.

I wonder about that sometimes myself.

 Icculus wrote:
If you play this game for the fun and flavor of the army then this book still provides you with some cool options to have fun.

I guess people's problem is that there are no such thing in the codex like "cool options". You have mediocre options at best and cheap grubs to boot. Like, give me only one thing that is a "cool option"... Well, maybe the kamikaze!Mawlock is hilarious but I can't see anything else.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Icculus wrote:
Does everybody here play WAAC? Does everyone here play only tournament settings and only the most optimized and maximized lists? If that's the case then go ahead and be upset about the book. If you play this game for the fun and flavor of the army then this book still provides you with some cool options to have fun.

I wonder about that sometimes myself.

There are about 30 people where I play, and none of them are WAAC. Most of us are sad older men who play with toys on tuesdays.

It's mediocre. It has some good stuff but is overall lacking and has removed many of the good aspects of the previous codex in favour of inferior ones. It shows the grave writing limitations that seem to plague Games Workshop.

Johnnytorrance wrote:
The one with the haters spouting crap and the one that starts a discussion on page 80 before anyone knew what was even in the codex?

"Haters"

"Spouting scrap"

Ah yes, the magnificent world of crappy ad-homien attacks, it's even funnier when you look into and realise everything that everyone said was based around leaked pages from the codex and information we knew to be true, but no addressing people's points is too hard. Calling them haters is easier. You could have just spammed WAAC and acted like any form of competitive play is a bad thing.

Jesus Christ you people.

 welshhoppo wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Icculus wrote:
Does everybody here play WAAC? Does everyone here play only tournament settings and only the most optimized and maximized lists? If that's the case then go ahead and be upset about the book. If you play this game for the fun and flavor of the army then this book still provides you with some cool options to have fun.

I wonder about that sometimes myself.

There are about 30 people where I play, and none of them are WAAC. Most of us are sad older men who play with toys on tuesdays.

Hilarious. That's how I feel.

 Icculus wrote:
Does everybody here play WAAC? Does everyone here play only tournament settings and only the most optimized and maximized lists? If that's the case then go ahead and be upset about the book. If you play this game for the fun and flavor of the army then this book still provides you with some cool options to have fun.

I'm very far from a tournament player. Never even been in one. I don't power game. Heck, I've been playing SOB even whey they kinda suck...and I play a canoness on top of that. But, I can still win occasionally.
Gaky armies aren't fun to play and either are cut and paste internet spam lists.

 Icculus wrote:
Does everybody here play WAAC? Does everyone here play only tournament settings and only the most optimized and maximized lists? If that's the case then go ahead and be upset about the book. If you play this game for the fun and flavor of the army then this book still provides you with some cool options to have fun.

I play with a small circle of friends who, between us, own models for almost every army at this point. Our local 'meta' is weak compared to the tournament meta. Yet we still run into situations regularly where people are threatening not to play against other people's lists, because even for us the power level between armies can be so imbalanced that it's not fun losing regularly.

The Chaos Marine codex is a particular sticking point for us right now because so, so many builds in it are terrible, and we don't own any helldrakes (and never will). Chaos Marines end up playing like lackluster loyalists with no fun toys. It's all too easy, for example, for our Guard player to accidentally put together army lists that our Chaos army practically can't beat. They don't see much table time as a result.

The point of my little anecdote is that even for non-WAAC players just hanging out with friends, it's nice when you feel like your matches are fair, especially if you can do it without debating whether one person should be allowed to use the perfectly legal models they bought because they're too powerful. When a codex is crammed with underpowered and disappointing units, it's just not very fun to play, for either side. Just like in sports - nobody likes to watch a blow-out.

I think the problem people have is that when codexs and indeed the game in general is so very unbalanced that is actually better for WAAC people as they can ensure they have a huge advantage over their opponents before a game even starts. People who don't care that much about winning will very likley still like the chance of winning with their chosen army. Its very little fun for a game to be all but decided before the first dice is rolled.

Wanting your army to be competitive does not make you a WAAC player.

 Icculus wrote:
Does everybody here play WAAC? Does everyone here play only tournament settings and only the most optimized and maximized lists? If that's the case then go ahead and be upset about the book. If you play this game for the fun and flavor of the army then this book still provides you with some cool options to have fun.

I'm not a tournament player but the codex lost a lot of the crutches that could give you a shot at winning. I don't have to win, but i don't want to get tabled either. I think everyone can agree the army wasnt a top army to begin with but it lost even more. I don't think its wrong for people to be upset, i mean come on, no biomancy, no doom, no spore pod, no ymgarl, -bs on guard, lost rerolls on swarmlord. The positives, minor point break, carnifexs might be okay, deathleaper might get into cc, but not against tau who will marker light you arrival turn and pull them on your assault. I haven't looked at exocrine too much so that might be good, but i don't know.

So don't be upset that people are complaining, its expected.

 Icculus wrote:
Does everybody here play WAAC?

No. What's that got to do with anything? Are you trying to explain away Codex deficiencies by saying the only people that care about them are WAAC players?

 Icculus wrote:
Does everyone here play only tournament settings and only the most optimized and maximized lists?

No. What's that got to do with anything? Are you trying to explain away Codex deficiencies by saying the only people that care about them are people who play only in tournament settings players?

 Icculus wrote:
If you play this game for the fun and flavor of the army...

*record scratch noise*

Stop right there. The strawman ends here. You're implying that tournament players/playing to win and fun are mutually exclusive. That's nonsense.

Come back when you have an actual argument and aren't attempting to dismiss a terrible Codex with some utter nonsense about "Play for flavour and fun".

And for the record, I've never been to a tournament nor do I really wish to go. I find competitive gaming boring and whilst I enjoy list building, tweaking the absolute min/max out of a list isn't my style. I'm almost a 100% narrative gamer these days, spending far more time playing the RPG's than the actual table top game. And this Codex suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuckkkssssssss. You don't have to be a WAAC or some nut-case "I don't play to win" idiot to see just how un-fething-believably terrible this book is.

Something is very wrong when a pair of scything talons do nothing other than ap6 which is same as having no ap at all...

Galanur wrote:
Something is very wrong when a pair of scything talons do nothing other than ap6 which is same as having no ap at all...

Wait, AP6 and AP- do the same thing?

Was there an FAQ or something?

Edit: My multilasers just got a LOT worse. :(

 Unit1126PLL wrote:


Wait, AP6 and AP- do the same thing?

Was there an FAQ or something?

Edit: My multilasers just got a LOT worse. :(

AP6 prevents 6+ armour save...

Iranna.

Its a sidegrade dex at best. Its very simplistic so I doubt any power combo is going to come in as it doesn't mix with the rulebook or other dexes. Which leaves limited options.

Stand out buffs:
-Spore mines, essentially just became the most annoying way to stop overwatch.

Not sure about:
-Mawlocs. That power is cool an all but if you don't kill everything you can mishap and kill yourself. Or you stand there like a idiot for a turn completely unsupported. Its oval base is bigger then the blast template. Lots of potential but lots of room for failure.

The ugly:
-Tervigons, another great case of gw using a hammer instead of a knife. Nerfed into the dirt. The beauty of tervigons was that it spewed out lots of scoring units, which is something nids have struggled with for ages, its troops suck so terribly bad at holding objectives, mostly because if they aren't fighting, they aren't protecting the synapse creatures, who then promptly die, and then the scoring unit breaks or is run down. Tervigons let you take objectives reliably and act as a synaptic anchor while the rest of the army moved forward. It also saturated the field with targets, wasting 10 marines on 7 gaunts and speed bumping were great ways at letting your enemy waste his points.

Now you have limited targets and taking a tervigon is very expensive and very bad for termagants. Only thing I can think of using this thing for is baby sitting biovores and a home objective or 2.

See whats maddening about this codex is not that is not "op", its that it is the same codex as before, with crappy new mcs (rules no models), points increase, and nerfs. yay.

its worst than the previous codex with new models you mean....

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Icculus wrote:
Does everybody here play WAAC?

No. What's that got to do with anything? Are you trying to explain away Codex deficiencies by saying the only people that care about them are WAAC players?

 Icculus wrote:
Does everyone here play only tournament settings and only the most optimized and maximized lists?

No. What's that got to do with anything? Are you trying to explain away Codex deficiencies by saying the only people that care about them are people who play only in tournament settings players?

 Icculus wrote:
If you play this game for the fun and flavor of the army...

*record scratch noise*

Stop right there. The strawman ends here. You're implying that tournament players/playing to win and fun are mutually exclusive. That's nonsense.

Come back when you have an actual argument and aren't attempting to dismiss a terrible Codex with some utter nonsense about "Play for flavour and fun".

And for the record, I've never been to a tournament nor do I really wish to go. I find competitive gaming boring and whilst I enjoy list building, tweaking the absolute min/max out of a list isn't my style. I'm almost a 100% narrative gamer these days, spending far more time playing the RPG's than the actual table top game. And this Codex suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuckkkssssssss. You don't have to be a WAAC or some nut-case "I don't play to win" idiot to see just how un-fething-believably terrible this book is.

What this man said.

Considering your army book to provide the same capabilities to win or lose, contain the same access to strong choices, ability to take on and win against other armies produced with other recent books, in the same studio by the same team, is not a requirement of 'WAAC' players, it's a requirement of a person who wants an enjoyable game and not a endless stream of losing sessions to stronger books, regardless of player knowledge or skill.

That's not some abstract demand of the 'competitive' players, that's a basic requirement of customer service and the unspoken agreement between GW and it's customer base. There is no warning, on entering GW or opening their website, that some books for their game will be written at one tier and others at a lower tier, the customer expectation is that they can stand a reasonable chance of playing and winning a game against another player of equatable skill and knowledge, regardless of the book/faction they chose.

IF this book has failed to meet that criteria, as a customer, I say they are breaking that unwritten agreement and not providing suitable levels of playtest and development to their product before releasing it. IF this codex falls so far south of the Tau or Eldar codices in terms of how it works in the 40k rules, then those people who chose to spend thousands of dollars on tyranids instead of thousands of dollars on tau, with the intention of playing the game created for the miniature's use, were mis-sold a product by the company and it should be getting ready to do some VERY serious online amendments to the product to bring it up to speed.

It is as much a failure as leaving an army choice not updated on the 'great cycle' of new codices and rules sets. There should be no inferior armies in terms of customer service and expectation, only inferior lists and player skills/experience.

Well I look at it this way, Every Codex that has come out in 6th has had 2-3 great build and generaly has been good if not better. You can't expect everyone to be great, it is very hard to bat a 1,000.

 Anpu42 wrote:
Well I look at it this way, Every Codex that has come out in 6th has had 2-3 great build and generaly has been good if not better. You can't expect everyone to be great, it is very hard to bat a 1,000.

doesn't chaos have 1 based around helldrakes and what else is taken doesn't realy matter ?

DA have 2-3 big builds? Also CSM don't really have a build honestly. Its like... some combo of a chaos lord either Nurgle, Khorne juggerlord, and the rare Slaanesh lord, oh and Huron!, obliterators, a rare daemon prince, a few Havocs maybe, plague marines, cultists (which honestly are actually honestly not that great either), and sometimes noise marines, almost always spawn, sometimes spawn, and a few chaos bikers maybe. DA the only post I can think of is the bolter banner.

Makumba wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
Well I look at it this way, Every Codex that has come out in 6th has had 2-3 great build and generaly has been good if not better. You can't expect everyone to be great, it is very hard to bat a 1,000.

doesn't chaos have 1 based around helldrakes and what else is taken doesn't realy matter ?

An I remeber when everyone was calling the Helldrake a stupid looking worthless unit.

You can build a good list without Heckturkes, but I find most are to lazy to try.

 Anpu42 wrote:

Makumba wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
Well I look at it this way, Every Codex that has come out in 6th has had 2-3 great build and generaly has been good if not better. You can't expect everyone to be great, it is very hard to bat a 1,000.

doesn't chaos have 1 based around helldrakes and what else is taken doesn't realy matter ?

An I remeber when everyone was calling the Helldrake a stupid looking worthless unit.

You can build a good list without Heckturkes, but I find most are to lazy to try.

Yes, it's commonly known as mono-nurgle.

Also, most people criticised the Hell Turkey for it's appearance. Not it's stats. Also, people criticising the codex in the previous rumour thread commonly based their criticism's upon the confirmed stats we had. The concept that the criticisms were based upon no information what so ever, is a plain out lie before anymore starts to try and claim it. You can however, make straw man and ad-homien attacks. It's an excellent replacement for a proper argument.

 Icculus wrote:
Does everybody here play WAAC? Does everyone here play only tournament settings and only the most optimized and maximized lists? If that's the case then go ahead and be upset about the book. If you play this game for the fun and flavor of the army then this book still provides you with some cool options to have fun.

I play Tzeentch marines, Khorne armies, occasionally mono Khorne daemon armies (without DP spam), my Tzeentch daemon army has never had more than 1 MC, I have never played screamerstar nor plan to, and my guardsman army is tanks and I warn people when I am taking them so I am not fighting DE with portion and anti infantry but little av. I bought a Held rake about a year ago and played it in 2 games and then promptly shelved it in disgust for how good it was, in our group the only flying units you see are FMC, our tau player doesn't even have a single riptide (he wants one though cause he likes the model), the two best players in our group are the CSM player and the Nid player (he also plays Eldar and Nurgle/Slaanesh daemons but his iconic army is nids). Our guardsman plays hammer and anvil (guardsman platoons supported by tanks and artillery) and occasionally the power blub without any allies. We play campaigns and are into story making. Each one of us has fluff for our own chapter or regiment or company of a chapter or Nid hive fleet or warband. This doesn't mean we don't want to win. We all want to win. We don't like to curb stomp each other when our list makes thematic sense. We want to have fun toll but honestly 40k's rules and codices occasionally make that difficult with wonky rules and imbalances between and within the codices.

Also tournaments can be fun. I have never been to one and never want to but tournaments =/= not fun.

 PrinceRaven wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I don't know if it has what it takes to be a competitive book, but it looks like it can be a fun one in my opinion.

It's funny, the only positive review of the new Tyranids I've read was by someone who clearly has no idea what they're talking about.

Nice jab I suppose, but the truth is that while I don't actively play Nids anymore (I did play using the 4th ed book, but not the Doom & Friends book) I'm not ignorant of the things that go on. I just don't look at it from a "will this win tournaments" perspective but a "can this be fun to play" one instead. The fact is I don't really support competitive 40k because it's a mess and a joke. Nothing Nids were going to get in an update where going to offset "I brought 4 Riptides" or "I brought 6+ Wave Serpents" and make them the new kind of tournament play. But they do look like fun.

Seriously though: Kill Teams for tournaments. It's a much better ruleset than what people are trying to cobble 40k into.

 Imposter101 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Makumba wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
Well I look at it this way, Every Codex that has come out in 6th has had 2-3 great build and generaly has been good if not better. You can't expect everyone to be great, it is very hard to bat a 1,000.

doesn't chaos have 1 based around helldrakes and what else is taken doesn't realy matter ?

An I remeber when everyone was calling the Helldrake a stupid looking worthless unit.

You can build a good list without Heckturkes, but I find most are to lazy to try.

Yes, it's commonly known as mono-nurgle.

Also, most people criticised the Hell Turkey for it's appearance. Not it's stats.

Admittedly hell turkey broke when it was faqd. Before that it was still pretty good. Admittedly Eldar and tau have many answers for it.

Also Dark Angels? I can honestly only think of one. DW seems fun but also don't really seem too functional.

Also honestly mono-nurgle whilst not bad still I wouldn't call hyper competitive or anything. It is an okay list (zombies can be annoying)

This Tyrannid codex seems to make the chaos codex look like solid flaming awesome in comparison.

 StarTrotter wrote:

 Imposter101 wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Makumba wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
Well I look at it this way, Every Codex that has come out in 6th has had 2-3 great build and generaly has been good if not better. You can't expect everyone to be great, it is very hard to bat a 1,000.

doesn't chaos have 1 based around helldrakes and what else is taken doesn't realy matter ?

An I remeber when everyone was calling the Helldrake a stupid looking worthless unit.

You can build a good list without Heckturkes, but I find most are to lazy to try.

Yes, it's commonly known as mono-nurgle.

Also, most people criticised the Hell Turkey for it's appearance. Not it's stats.

Admittedly hell turkey broke when it was faqd. Before that it was still pretty good. Admittedly Eldar and tau have many answers for it.

Also honestly mono-nurgle whilst not bad still I wouldn't call hyper competitive or anything. It is an okay list (zombies can be annoying)

No, that's the super Typhus zombie apocalypse build. I'm taking about the Plague marine party van, with every other unit having the mark of Nurgle. Every unit having toughness five and a majority having feel no pain makes the list pretty effective.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MWHistorian wrote:
This Tyrannid codex seems to make the chaos codex look like solid flaming awesome in comparison.

It makes the Chaos codex look like fething Citizen Kane.