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.

Some background on me, about 6 months ago I got a good job, as a result I realized that I could save up money to get into a hobby of my choice. When I was younger I got into 40k through my cousin and started building an IG army, but once I realized that I would not have the money to get a decent army with IG kind of left it on the shelf for a while, long story short I no longer posses that army, but am okay with that. So I started looking through the lore and found the army I wanted. I then began looking at the rules for every other army to see what I would get first. That was six months ago, and I have looked at every single codex one can look at without paying money, which is all of them. And have come to the conclusion that Chaos Space Marines (CSM) get the biggest shaft I have ever seen, with exception to maybe Orks and DE. I will begin with an analogy and move on to point out the similarities in the analogy to Space Marines (SM) and CSM, show some math between CSM and SM, point out reactions that people have on forums when CSM players complain about this alleged inequity, and finally the simple fix that is needed.

Imagine your going to buy a car, and when you get to the dealership you see two cars. They are fairly similar the outside, and even on the inside fairly similar the only real difference is the software build into the computer, which is identical, in each car. Now one computer has a bunch of extra features that come free, while the other car, has some features that the other does but in the end has less, but has them as upgrade options for no apparent reason. You have to pay more for the the same thing, on top of that there is a wi-fi feature with the car that costs the company nothing little to nothing to update said car.

Now your probably wondering, what does the above have to do with CSM and SM, well this is the exact situation CSM are in with SM. They have similar everything, look, stat lines, and even USRs, the diffence is that CSM units have to pay for extra little things where SM do not. Chapter Tactics being free on SM and Marks having to be paid for on CSM. Combat Squads which is probably the most egregious allows SM to bring heavy weapons in what amounts to min squads of SM, while CSM to do the same thing have to bring a full squad of 10 which. Whats more is because the combat squad is split in half one of your squads can move up with out the Heavy Weapon preventing the need to snap shot, or put the heavy weapon in direct line of fire. ATSKNF, is another point of contention where it prevents units from being overrun entirely and essentially gives SM a better version of fearless for free, CSM have to pay points to get this boost further increasing the already existing gap, but this is all just conjecture right? That there is a gap does not mean it is noticeable, so lets move on to the math and see what exactly this gap looks like.

A CSM with a Mark of Khorne (MoK), and Veterans of the Long War (VotLW) costs 16 points per model, A SM with Chapter Tactics and ATSKNF costs 14 points, now you might be thinking yeah well what does the MoK do in comparison to other things, well it gives rage and counter-attack, so two generic close combat special rules that improve the unit by a noticeable amount, now lets compare that to some of the special rules SMs get. So Black Templars (BT) have some special rules, Crusader, a combo of Fearless and Hatred, and Adamantium Will, BUT there is something else, they gain Rage and Counter Attack if they lose a model to a shooting attack. They also have the ability to put Neophytes (Marine Scouts) in their squads which gives them access to cheap disposable units to put at the front of the guys that will be doing the real damage. Now, that's only one mark, lets look at the Mark of Tzeench (MoT) which gives a 6+ invul save and adds to a +1 to any invul save you have (so a 4+ because a 3+). Its the same exact cost for the MoT on a CSM with VoTLW 16 points. Compare this with the Iron hands benefit Iron Hands get a 6+ FnP that adds 1 if you already have access to FnP (so a 5+ becomes a 4+). There is no comparison here, one is an additional save you get no matter what on top of your regular save the other you take IF you get no armor save, which is a slight increase in durability but nothing truly noticeable (it would take an 18 man squad all dying from AP 3 fire to get 3 "additional" wounds). On top of that they get It Will Not Die (IWND) on ALL of their vehicles. Now let us see how this works when putting it into a list this will help account for what Combat Squads (CS) actually does for a SM army.

So lets assume you want to be able to put two squads on the table to get Objective Secured on two different objectives. So a space marine can take 1 squad make them 10 guys and split them in two jobs done, but wait he wants fire support for that squad so he adds a Heavy Bolter, but he doesn't want his Heavy Bolter sitting on the objective so he adds a second squad of 5 he then up grades the large squad with 1 Veteran Sergeant, and 1 Rhino for each squad to get the five man squads, total cost is 314 points for 15 models and 1 Heavy bolter and 1 veteran Sargent (to be put with the heavy weapons squad) and two 5 man squads to move in on objectives. Now the CSM player has the same idea he wants some heavy weapons fire with for his two squads. So he brings the same setup as above (which costs 350 points), except he can't split his squads in two, the way the SM player can, and the only way for him to be sure that terrain is not blocking the one heavy bolter from supporting the other squad of five is to give them a heavy bolter. This ups CSMs players cost to 430 points, which then allows the SM player to bring 120 points of things so he upgrades his stuff to EXACTLY what the CSM player has 2 units with Veteran Sergeant upgrade, 2 heavy bolters and 2 rhinos, the cost? 390 points. That's a 40 point difference in favor of the SM player that can position his two heavy weapons so that they can support BOTH of the units holding the objectives. Since the SM player has 40 points left to spend he adds 1 plasma gun to each squad and upgrades each Rhino with a second Storm Bolter. I wonder who will end up holding the objectives, or have the most models left after two rounds of shooting? That brings us to forums and the reactions

The reactions on forums are often the worst part, "stop whining" and things of that nature, which to say the least is not a rebuttal, and displays an acute lack of empathy, on top of that an ignorance of how numbers work. When someone points out that one army can get more, have better positioning options, and pay less points for those things, then the only proper reaction is a display of empathy, not name call and assert that they are just entitled. So how do we fix this?

Well there are two problems here, or so it seems, SMs are paying to little for what they have available to them and CSM, too much. It really is a big problem, one that, too my knowledge GW wont even admit to. Which is even a bigger problem, since GW must admit there is a problem before they can ever fix the problem. So baby steps get on the bus lets try and get GW to admit to the problem, not just for CSMs either Orks and DE as well, along with the over tuned armies

TL;DR- CSM are objectively worse then SM from a PPM standpoint, SM get a 2 point handicap per model, and have more flexible units. Stop calling them names when everything they say is objectively true. Try looking to GW and saying this is unacceptable and we WILL boycott your product if you don't change things.

Rebutting Rebuttals:

"Just use cultists" - No, I don't want to use Cultists, I want to use CSM, and again this does not address the fact that SM pay less for more.

"You just want spikey SMs" - No I don't, if I did then I would just use the SM book and come up with my own chapter, again this does not change the fact that SMs pay less for more.

"But CSM have higher LD" - Yes they do and it accounts for exactly 1 failed LD check per 10 rolls as a difference CSM: 92% success rate SM: 83% success rate, the difference here is that when you run SMs can't be overrun while CSMs can. These two things cancel each other out in my eyes.

"Just use (insert non CSM codex here)" - No, I should be able to pick a codex and build a decent army from that codex, and have a chance at winning. I should not have to spend money on 4+ supplements to be able to hold my own in a friendly game. Again this does not address the fact that SM pay less for more.

"Traitors Hate was Good" - No, it was decent, not good, not bad, just decent. On top of that look at the Blood Angels supplement that just came out. They literally got everything the CSMs did only better this only serves to prove my point, and again this does not address the fact that SM pay less for more.

"Your just a 3.5 Glory days Chaos Player" - No, I'm not. I'm someone that wants to get into the hobby, but has ONLY negative incentives, can't play the army I want, and will have to spend stupid amounts of money just to get my foot in the door of the hobby.

You missed one rebuttal:

DEAL WITH IT.

And it IS a valid rebuttal: we know CSM have a bad codex, there's no need for you to point the obvious and over-indicated. But can we change it? NO, so stop whining (even if it's for valid causes) and deal with it because we shouldn't have to hear you CONSTANTLY remeber us how bad CSM are (and I know because I play them too) and in the process makes us feel like gak for not playing mainly a failure of an army.

Chaos tears are best when used to make coffee.

Eh, I like my noise marines, for a bit more cost I get a Str 8 ap 3 ignore cover blast weapon (RIP infantry) for 3 points more per model I get a 3 shot bolter with ignore cover and have the option for cheap CC weapons and DOOM SIREN which is such a fluffy kick ass weapon to include with your CC noise marines. In reguards to infantry I think the blastmaster is better than SM grav weapons largely due to the instant death and ignore cover being so strong against codecies like necrons, Eldar and many SM chapters that are bike heavy and rely on jink.

Reavas wrote:
Eh, I like my noise marines, for a bit more cost I get a Str 8 ap 3 ignore cover blast weapon (RIP infantry) for 3 points more per model I get a 3 shot bolter with ignore cover and have the option for cheap CC weapons and DOOM SIREN which is such a fluffy kick ass weapon to include with your CC noise marines. In reguards to infantry I think the blastmaster is better than SM grav weapons largely due to the instant death and ignore cover being so strong against codecies like necrons, Eldar and many SM chapters that are bike heavy and rely on jink.

Yeah, I love those too. For me noise marines are the best troops in the codex, plague marines be damned.

Yeah the Nurgle/Slaanesh Cult Troops seem to be in an alright place what I'm talking about is Tzeentch in particular I have very few options and 1k Sons are so expensive that bringing them as a troops choice is impossible, not to mention that they are one of the most niche units in the game. Berserkers are slightly better off but only slightly.

Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote:
Yeah the Nurgle/Slaanesh Cult Troops seem to be in an alright place what I'm talking about is Tzeentch in particular I have very few options and 1k Sons are so expensive that bringing them as a troops choice is impossible, not to mention that they are one of the most niche units in the game. Berserkers are slightly better off but only slightly.

Oh if you take thousand sons out individually as its own codex/suppliment you are looking at literally the worst codex in the game, hands down, no competition. The concept is amazing, putting psykers in normal squads of marines is cool but not only do have them forced to take crappy spells but they are incredibly overpriced. Khornate units arent far behind and are in comparison to thousand sons, average at best, compared to anything else they are garbage.

Personally tzeench and khorn can get as shafted as much as possible for all I care. I run slannesh so not only is shafting things in general my sorta thing but it dosn't affect my pretty noise marine or my cultists and sorcerers which are some of the best things in the codex IMO.

Reavas wrote:

Thousand-Son-Sorcerer wrote:
Yeah the Nurgle/Slaanesh Cult Troops seem to be in an alright place what I'm talking about is Tzeentch in particular I have very few options and 1k Sons are so expensive that bringing them as a troops choice is impossible, not to mention that they are one of the most niche units in the game. Berserkers are slightly better off but only slightly.

Oh if you take thousand sons out individually as its own codex/suppliment you are looking at literally the worst codex in the game, hands down, no competition. The concept is amazing, putting psykers in normal squads of marines is cool but not only do have them forced to take crappy spells but they are incredibly overpriced. Khornate units arent far behind and are in comparison to thousand sons, average at best, compared to anything else they are garbage.

Personally tzeench and khorn can get as shafted as much as possible for all I care. I run slannesh so not only is shafting things in general my sorta thing but it dosn't affect my pretty noise marine or my cultists and sorcerers which are some of the best things in the codex IMO.

Oh I cant stop LMAO...Yeah I know even considered putting Noise Marines in my army and making up fluff for them to have Psychic weapons instead of sonic weapons. The overpriced thing is what gets me the most a simple Errata could fix it to make them more reasonable instead they leave the problem to fester.

Well I feel you man. Altough to be fair, this only shows how much the SM factions have been pumped by GW. They're literally getting everything good, while having almost no weak sides. Traitor's Hate was decent, but compared to Angels of Death it's crap.

I'd argue that CSM core formations are way better than BA ones. Well, maybe DC one is decent.

Well, part of the issue is that you say you don't want to be just marines with spikes, but you sure are trying to play like them.

The first thing in CSM, is that you need to NOT do the direct comparisons like CSM to tacticals. because yes, in any direct comparison you will be beaten (well, except raptors to assaults. raptors win here due to meltaguns), and rightfully so-the SM things are the SM things, if chaos had the CSM things just as good or better on top of having their own unique things, there would be no reason for non-chaos marines to exist.

A chaos player needs to go after all the things regular marines just cant compare to.
Cult marines, daemon marines, daemon engines, etc.
Sure, some of them are horribly under-powered in their own right, and some outright a flop-but they are what makes chaos marines chaos rather than just spike marines. THESE are the things you want to revolve around, not the generic marines stuff.

"Fixing Chaos" is not about matching regular marines in the compareable units, its about having the comparable as your job fillers, while your true focus is on the unique.
On the things that are Chaos, and not spike marines.

I'm completely fine with CSM squads being inferior to tacticals, as long as the true chaos parts of the codex shine the way they are supposed to. Unfortunately, as of now, they don't.
(though KDK got damn close to making a true chaos codex that actually works pretty darn well, its just not quite up there due to how FMC and summoning interacts. and the fact it lacks some khorne named characters is just sad.)

Lord Kragan wrote:
You missed one rebuttal:

DEAL WITH IT.

And it IS a valid rebuttal: we know CSM have a bad codex, there's no need for you to point the obvious and over-indicated. But can we change it? NO, so stop whining (even if it's for valid causes) and deal with it because we shouldn't have to hear you CONSTANTLY remeber us how bad CSM are (and I know because I play them too) and in the process makes us feel like gak for not playing mainly a failure of an army.

I do not think that is a valid rebuttal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BoomWolf wrote:
Well, part of the issue is that you say you don't want to be just marines with spikes, but you sure are trying to play like them.

The first thing in CSM, is that you need to NOT do the direct comparisons like CSM to tacticals. because yes, in any direct comparison you will be beaten (well, except raptors to assaults. raptors win here due to meltaguns), and rightfully so-the SM things are the SM things, if chaos had the CSM things just as good or better on top of having their own unique things, there would be no reason for non-chaos marines to exist.

A chaos player needs to go after all the things regular marines just cant compare to.
Cult marines, daemon marines, daemon engines, etc.
Sure, some of them are horribly under-powered in their own right, and some outright a flop-but they are what makes chaos marines chaos rather than just spike marines. THESE are the things you want to revolve around, not the generic marines stuff.

"Fixing Chaos" is not about matching regular marines in the compareable units, its about having the comparable as your job fillers, while your true focus is on the unique.
On the things that are Chaos, and not spike marines.

I'm completely fine with CSM squads being inferior to tacticals, as long as the true chaos parts of the codex shine the way they are supposed to. Unfortunately, as of now, they don't.
(though KDK got damn close to making a true chaos codex that actually works pretty darn well, its just not quite up there due to how FMC and summoning interacts. and the fact it lacks some khorne named characters is just sad.)

I think one of the great problems with the codex is the fact that in 90% of non-fluff lists, you wont see a actual CSM in sight. I mean, at this point they should just just call it, chaos stuff that isnt demons.

I love how CSM players say Angel's Blade was better while BA players say Traitor's Hate was better.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Well, part of the issue is that you say you don't want to be just marines with spikes, but you sure are trying to play like them.

The first thing in CSM, is that you need to NOT do the direct comparisons like CSM to tacticals. because yes, in any direct comparison you will be beaten (well, except raptors to assaults. raptors win here due to meltaguns), and rightfully so-the SM things are the SM things, if chaos had the CSM things just as good or better on top of having their own unique things, there would be no reason for non-chaos marines to exist.

This is totally irrelevent to the fact that CSMs cost more and get less

 BoomWolf wrote:
A chaos player needs to go after all the things regular marines just cant compare to.
Cult marines, daemon marines, daemon engines, etc.
Sure, some of them are horribly under-powered in their own right, and some outright a flop-but they are what makes chaos marines chaos rather than just spike marines. THESE are the things you want to revolve around, not the generic marines stuff.

Yes I understand that and we need to fix things one thing at a time. Dropping the cost of the base CSM would transfer to everything that uses CSM as a base so Warp Talons, Cult Marines, would all get a price drop.

 BoomWolf wrote:
"Fixing Chaos" is not about matching regular marines in the compareable units, its about having the comparable as your job fillers, while your true focus is on the unique.
On the things that are Chaos, and not spike marines.

And I never said it was what I said is that if a unit costs more per model then it should be better not worse. In this case the opposite is true.

 BoomWolf wrote:
I'm completely fine with CSM squads being inferior to tacticals, as long as the true chaos parts of the codex shine the way they are supposed to. Unfortunately, as of now, they don't.
(though KDK got damn close to making a true chaos codex that actually works pretty darn well, its just not quite up there due to how FMC and summoning interacts. and the fact it lacks some khorne named characters is just sad.)

I'm fine with that too, what I'm not fine with is them being inferior and paying more for them, that is like saying yeah I have a Pinto and they have a Ferrari but I'm fine paying more for the Pinto.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 EnTyme wrote:
I love how CSM players say Angel's Blade was better while BA players say Traitor's Hate was better.

That's because most BA players don't realize how little Chaos has in the way of non-scattering deep strike. Which becomes even less when you get into taking a CS or BL detachment.

The issue with people saying "Look at what you get that SM don't get!" is that what we get there is just plain not enough. About the only Daemon Engine that'd see use if it got an equivalent in the SM codex is the Heldrake. Forgefiends aren't bad, but they aren't that good either. Maulerfiends are actually pretty decent, but they lack compared to Assault Centurions. (I can't believe I just said that.) The Defiler is just a hot mess.

The only good things CSM have are Spawn, Princes, and Heldrakes. The rest varies from bad to decent.

I love the Forge Fiend, but why oh why is it bs3?
I love the Mauler Fiend, but why oh why is it ws3? I would rather remove the demonforge rule to give them 4 in these categories. Also the fact that an immobilized mauler is worthless..... but I can deal with that, stuff happens.

For these things do be dedicated to a certain role for their points costs, they should be good enough to do that role, but they aren't at the moment.

Table wrote:

Lord Kragan wrote:
You missed one rebuttal:

DEAL WITH IT.

And it IS a valid rebuttal: we know CSM have a bad codex, there's no need for you to point the obvious and over-indicated. But can we change it? NO, so stop whining (even if it's for valid causes) and deal with it because we shouldn't have to hear you CONSTANTLY remeber us how bad CSM are (and I know because I play them too) and in the process makes us feel like gak for not playing mainly a failure of an army.

I do not think that is a valid rebuttal.

What do you expect from the poster in question? As soon as any CSM player starts making opinions on balance, the individuals fingers twitch and flail on the keyboard. Its why everyone on this thread seems to have ignored that post.

My own personal opinion on the matter for me is that CSM just don't have identity. We just have layers of stereotype upon stereotype, hence why every CSM must accept and make challenges even though certain Legions and Warbands would never work this way. It's why we have boons everywhere despite certain Legions and warbands really don't like the idea of mutation. I believe we should take certain aspects from the Loyalists but I don't believe in a direct C+P. As the game evolves into a more squad-by-squad basis rather than the individual in a squad I feel that CSM need stuff to represent this and so I would imagine the mark system becoming our equivalent of the Combat Doctrines with a undivided "mark" in addition so that every flavor of CSM can get an accurate representation. VotLW should be free an in addition we should also get Renegade as well, where Renegade is ATSKNF and Vets is the Legions Astartes rule, now I already hear the responses of a 30k rule in a 40k book, but in all honesty I feel if the book was done right then it would give a very different play style for CSM giving them identity, I also believe that if we get Legion/Warband tactics then this should force us to take one or the other to further reflect the identity of what your playing against. Instead of grav-weapons I feel we should get Volikite weapons, and give us a wider variety to restricted Wargear for example Lords should get Fleshmetal and Ectoplasma cannons and Hades Autocannons should become accessible towards Havocs; Again its different from Loyalists but it takes an aspect from that book and fleshes out the CSM with a different playstyle giving them identity.

Failing that if GW is hellbent on reinforcing a stereotype then I would propose a rule to give us something powerful but not game breaking. Soulcleave: In 10,000 year CSM have technology that easily pierces through the layer of reality to raise their bitter war in the Long War... For every successful roll of 6 to wound/penetrate that wound deal a -1 to the targets Invulnerable save to a maximum of 6+. Now apply this to Ectoplasma Cannons and Warp Talon Claws. To differentiate Ectoplasma cannons from Havocs and Forgefiends I would propose that Forgefiends should get the following with a name change to "Heavy Ectoplasma Cannon": Soulrend: Weapons made from The Warp which not only destroy a material body but completely obliterates a soul to the Warp... For every successful roll to wound/penetrate on a 6 deals a -2 penalty to the targets invulnerable Sv to a maximum of 6+. To me this would not break the game because every army has access to some form of D-Weapon which ignores any saves but gives us a strong option to give us some form of identity.

 happygolucky wrote:

What do you expect from the poster in question? As soon as any CSM player starts making opinions on balance, the individuals fingers twitch and flail on the keyboard. Its why everyone on this thread seems to have ignored that post.

My own personal opinion on the matter for me is that CSM just don't have identity. We just have layers of stereotype upon stereotype, hence why every CSM must accept and make challenges even though certain Legions and Warbands would never work this way. It's why we have boons everywhere despite certain Legions and warbands really don't like the idea of mutation.

Yeah the boon thing irritates me the most as 1k sons Don't like mutations at all. Case and point the Rubric on top of that Ahriman once Killed a CSM that started to mutate and liked it. They obviously despise it, and yet they get Boon of Mutation as one of their spells. Also the RNG needs to go. I realize its supposed to give CSM an unpredictable feel, but it must be frustrating to have your 250 point lord win a challenge only to have him turned into a spawn.

When you get a bit more experience under your belt you'll see how this works. The game is balanced at the codex level, not the unit level. If you build a CSM army and an SM army in the same way, one will be better than the other.

CSM will destroy SM if you build them both as walker spam. If you have a no characters - elite infantry design cult troops will get the better of veterans. If you go with heavy shooters grav cents will put oblits on their backs.

Each dex is good at different things, and they pay different points values for those things (compare respective entries for rhinos).

The balance that matters is what the lists that you can build with each codex do against one another, but to get to that point, to assess that value, you'll need to abandon your opposition to battle brothers and look at the greater tourney meta.

When you do, you'll realize that discussions of who pays more for tac marines with heavy weapons aren't important at all, and you'll be ashamed to admit that you instructed a bunch of strangers to boycott GW over it.

The problem is that CSM's vs SM's on a codex level are also wildly imbalanced. Nobody runs walker spam because its an awful build in 7E in general, but I'd give the edge to the SM's handily. Great DS capability, AV13 options, A4 dreads and WS/BS/I 4 on everything instead mostly being 3's the way the daemon engines are.

@Vakathi:

It's debatable. That invul save goes a very long way, as does the forgefiends' long range firepower and daemonforge.

You'll see a lot more CSM walker armies (can't even say how many people see Maulerfiend and are like , yep, 3 of those, beasts with jugger lords, that'll def win) than you will SM armies. (SM players who want walkers just become Knight players). The walker section of CSM is "live", while the SM one is not.

This doesn't matter, because both kinds of walker spam lists would flush out round 1 or 2, but the premise of this discussion was some noise about how expensive tac squads were, so I felt justified.

He's new, we don't want to just be like "Dude, play Tau". If he still wants to talk CSM vs SM I'm happy to entertain the scenario.

Hey folks I'm not up on the confirmed incoming releases. QUick question as a result:

Is there a chaos dex slated for early 2017, according to strong rumor mill?

If there is not, I need to buy a paperback copy.

Hope someone can help. Thanks.

P.S. -- > and yes, I loved playing Noise Marines (without the expensive heavy weapon) before I sold my 'dex. I want to try them In Kill Team.

Yes, the codex as a whole IS underpowered, nobody
questions that.

But just look at what some people here are suggesting.
Turning marks to be like chapter tactics, giving ATSKNF "tactics", etc.
These suggesting exactly WILL turn CSM into spike marines, rather than enforce their own identity.

To enforce the CSM identity one should, nay one MUST stop making comparisons to marines.
Basic CSM being inferior to regular marines and costing less achieves nothing-as you still got the same unit in the end. the fact they are less cost-effiecet makes them less of a centerpoint and that ALRIGHT, as long the actual centerpoints would be fixed.





What should be fixed are the things that ARE the unique tastes of the CSM.
The daemon engines are mostly rather good. heldrakes are amazing, forge/maulerfiend have thier nieches, its just that the iconic defiler is too derp right now. and to fix the defiler doesn't take more than a point reduction, being a mess is part of it's thing. (and CSM got helbrutes to match SM dreads)

The cult marines each has an obvious niche they are supposed to play, its just that sans the plague's "high durability position holders" none of them fills it properly, mostly because of overpricing. zerkers don't chop hordes cheaply enough for their choppyness, noise don't create the shooting gallery properly due to prices and 1ksons fail the "marine slayer/counter marine slayer" role because they cost too much for that.

The "flexible yet unwieldy at times" daemon marines that are oblits and muties feel CSM and really push an agenda regular marines just can't match, unfortunatly only one really works because the latter costs far too much for its speed.

The "raw power though unreliable" spawn and possessed are true CSM flavor, they just need to cost a bit less.


CSM themes SHOULD be around all the things you can't quite control, cant quite predict or cant use as you wish, but in return get a surge in power.
Heck, even the RNG factors many people complain about-they are GOOD for the codex. then make it chaos-unpredictable and uncontrollable. they just need to be better RNG, and more tilted in the favor of the user.

 happygolucky wrote:

Table wrote:

Lord Kragan wrote:
You missed one rebuttal:

DEAL WITH IT.

And it IS a valid rebuttal: we know CSM have a bad codex, there's no need for you to point the obvious and over-indicated. But can we change it? NO, so stop whining (even if it's for valid causes) and deal with it because we shouldn't have to hear you CONSTANTLY remeber us how bad CSM are (and I know because I play them too) and in the process makes us feel like gak for not playing mainly a failure of an army.

I do not think that is a valid rebuttal.

What do you expect from the poster in question? As soon as any CSM player starts making opinions on balance, the individuals fingers twitch and flail on the keyboard. Its why everyone on this thread seems to have ignored that post.

What do you expect from a chaos (for hell's sake, my username is a refernce to the leader of my CSM warband) player that went and said: okay, this is the warp-how-many time we get shat upon in mechanics, so screw this codex I'm going to another place.

I love how much you're misrepresenting me,lovely indeed.

Nevertheless this discussions are the most sterile thing to ever come in 40k: we won't influence nothing from debating and gnashing our teeth on how much we'd like to have a nice time with our own army and that how we need to pull thrice the effort others have to just to have a marginally good time with this codex.

Certainly I hope they do bring something novel with Magnus and the Thousand Sons, I certainly do want to dust off my noise marines of the Flawless host. But honestly, I hold little hope.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shrapnelsmile wrote:
Hey folks I'm not up on the confirmed incoming releases. QUick question as a result:

P.S. -- > and yes, I loved playing Noise Marines (without the expensive heavy weapon) before I sold my 'dex. I want to try them In Kill Team.

Oh you were missing quite treat then. Nothing beats a confident white scar player's face when seeing one of those bad boys.

 Shrapnelsmile wrote:
Hey folks I'm not up on the confirmed incoming releases. QUick question as a result:

Is there a chaos dex slated for early 2017, according to strong rumor mill?

If there is not, I need to buy a paperback copy.

Hope someone can help. Thanks.

P.S. -- > and yes, I loved playing Noise Marines (without the expensive heavy weapon) before I sold my 'dex. I want to try them In Kill Team.

Rumors say no Codex updates (with the possible exception of out-of-date armies. Thousand Sons was all but confirmed with the Magnus reveal and Sisters of Battle rumors resurged in the same video) until next edition, probably mid-2017. Wouldn't be much point in updating CSM and then having to do it again next year. Supplements and campaign book only until then.

 EnTyme wrote:

 Shrapnelsmile wrote:
Hey folks I'm not up on the confirmed incoming releases. QUick question as a result:

Is there a chaos dex slated for early 2017, according to strong rumor mill?

If there is not, I need to buy a paperback copy.

Hope someone can help. Thanks.

P.S. -- > and yes, I loved playing Noise Marines (without the expensive heavy weapon) before I sold my 'dex. I want to try them In Kill Team.

Rumors say no Codex updates (with the possible exception of out-of-date armies. Thousand Sons was all but confirmed with the Magnus reveal and Sisters of Battle rumors resurged in the same video) until next edition, probably mid-2017. Wouldn't be much point in updating CSM and then having to do it again next year. Supplements and campaign book only until then.

It's GW we are talking about, No point in something won't deter them from doing it.

 BoomWolf wrote:
(and CSM got helbrutes to match SM dreads)

??? You're saying that as if CSM didn't have Chaos Dreadnoughts before. Not to mention how pretty much every legion-specific Chaos Dreadnought from Forgeworld just was miles ahead of the Helbrute kit in both design and identity.

So in regards to the OP: Free VoTLW matters more than just sweeping. Take Havocs for example. Chances are they'll be near the board edge, making the auto-regroup effectively pointless and even if they're not, a turn they spend falling back or regrouping is a turn they spend not firing. Ditto the same for Bikers, where the extra D6 fallback distance can easily disrupt your plans.

Of course, this is all "academic" since nobody runs Tactical Marines outside of a Battle Demi-Company. Also, nobody runs Heavy Bolters

Now, you do get some fringe bonuses here and there, which do let you fight an asymmetrical game. Chaos does Psykers better than other armies, simply put . Spell Familiars are nice, and unlike Loyalists, you get ML 3 Sorcerers. You get Angels of Death copypaste powers too, which do a *lot* for your army's utility. The Chaos Warband is arguably every bit as good as a conventional Battle Demi-Company, as there's a lot more slotting flexibility in building your army.

 Korinov wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:
(and CSM got helbrutes to match SM dreads)

??? You're saying that as if CSM didn't have Chaos Dreadnoughts before. Not to mention how pretty much every legion-specific Chaos Dreadnought from Forgeworld just was miles ahead of the Helbrute kit in both design and identity.

I think he's speaking more of the fact that Hellbrutes up until the FAQ had less attacks than the loyalists. Now they match them.

40kenthusiast wrote:
When you get a bit more experience under your belt you'll see how this works. The game is balanced at the codex level, not the unit level. If you build a CSM army and an SM army in the same way, one will be better than the other.

Okay so what your saying is that GW has special psychic powers that lets them know exactly what everyone is going to run for every game they play...ever? No I'm sorry that is just plain stupid, the only way to balance a codex externally is to know ahead of time what each person is going to bring, and the Force Org Chart only gives guide lines, which means your going to have some people bringing 6 uints of Troops, 2 units of fast attack, and 1 HQ, while some one else with the same army may bring 2 min units of troops 3 units of fast attack, 3 units of HS and 1 HQ, and where as the former is heavy in infantry the latter is heavy in armor. There is no way to balance that externally you HAVE to do it internally on a model level.

40kenthusiast wrote:
CSM will destroy SM if you build them both as walker spam. If you have a no characters - elite infantry design cult troops will get the better of veterans. If you go with heavy shooters grav cents will put oblits on their backs.

No they wouldn't, Dreads with Lascannons/ ML will take apart any walker available to chaos, easily, and for less points.

Dread with TL Lascannon and ML 125 points

Helbrute with TL Lascannon and ML 135 points

Plus you have chapter tactics and don't have to roll on a chart that may or may not force you to run in the shooting phase all on a chassis that has slightly less options. What a sick deal!!!!!

40kenthusiast wrote:
Each dex is good at different things, and they pay different points values for those things (compare respective entries for rhinos).

Okay what is the CSM army good at because its not good at killing hordes, not in comparison to other armies at least, its okay at bringing hordes, but I don't want to bring cultists I WANT CSM not the Codex the actual models, not daemons, CSM. As for the Rhino point you mean that I'm able to get slightly more options on 11/11/10 chassis that can be glanced to death by S5 fire and have to be within 24" to use most of its upgrades some of which are slightly above worthless? Warpflame Gargoyles for example, do you know how many games I have watched were soul blaze actually killed something? 1 in i don't know how many games probably 500+ over the past 4 months or so, its a 5 point upgrade that is worth MAYBE 3 points, AND it actively punishes you for focusing fire, or maybe adding a havoc launcher and another combi bolter sure it adds 17 points in cost but you get some decent dakka oh yeah 11 front armor so mass S5 shots wreck that thing fast, and is there even an army that doesn't have easy cheap access to S7 shots? In fact the only thing CSMs do really well is bring Psykers, okay then what group have the best Psykers, Oh Tzeentch clearly I mean look at the lore, so naturally the Tzeentch table is the best table in the book. Nope I have yet to meet some one that thinks the Tzeentch table is anything but the worst of those 3 and possiblely the worst out of every table in the game.

40kenthusiast wrote:
The balance that matters is what the lists that you can build with each codex do against one another, but to get to that point, to assess that value, you'll need to abandon your opposition to battle brothers and look at the greater tourney meta.

I'm not interested in the tourney meta, IDGAF about people that abandon tactics all together in order to try to create some super death-star unit, or use as many flyers as possible. I simply want to be able to run the units I want to run and have a chance at winning. But that wont happen if I have a 200 point disadvantage against most of my opponents.

40kenthusiast wrote:
When you do, you'll realize that discussions of who pays more for tac marines with heavy weapons aren't important at all, and you'll be ashamed to admit that you instructed a bunch of strangers to boycott GW over it.

If you honestly believe that having extra points to spend else where on extra upgrades, or adding more models to what you have is "not important" then I am certain you have no idea what your talking about.