Question On Chaos changes

[Brother Nicolas]

I have noticed that people seem to hate the new codexes that are coming out. If what I have heard is true and GW is going to make a list for the different aspects of Chaos would not this provide more play options. I realize that there have been codex out there were you could min/max everything and anything. But would it not be a lot more enjoyable to have one list for the lower sm lists, one for demons, one for cults and one for Black Crusades (legion list). If done right each list would have its own play styles.

 

I realize that when the new SM Chaos Codex came out that the local Chaos guys hated it but most have started to enjoy the new aspect and changes that it has provided. I think they will enjoy Chaos a lot if GW comes out with several Codexes’ for them with different themes.

 

Please no rants. Why do you hate the Idea of seveal dex's instead of just one. Do you not like the idea of better played games were you have to learn to play? OR is it change that you dont like? What would you like to see come?

[Celestial Dragon King]

A lot of people were hurt by the new codex, like myself. I had two armies Alpha Legion lost cultists so i have $60 of converted figs collecting dust and virtually un-sellable. I also had EC who lost my converted expensive bikes, a lot of blastmasters, converted Dread, and Predator, and a few other things. So yes I'd be happy if they did come out with codexes for them. I'm not happy at all with the Ultramarines of Chaos. I think if you played DA, BT, SW or BA you'd be pissed if they then told you all now had to play basic marines. So at least a little bit to set us apart would be nice. I'd even like it if they did like the old Slaves of Darkness book by doing two armies in one codex. they could do a Slannesh/Khorne and at Tzeentch/Nurgle. The existing codex being Undivded (though I see it as a Black Legion codex period, not even undivided or renegade).

[Wulfen Lord Leo]

I agree whole heartedly with CDK, I was going to start a World Bearers army with lots of different daemons but now I cant due to this codex.

[Rain]

The main problem with the new codex is that it replaced one of the most customizable and heterogeneous codicies with one of the most homogeneous and boring. I mean there isn't even a wargear section, only standard options you can buy so now all Chaos characters are virtually the same, not very chaotic if you ask me. Also, a lot of models are now either illegal or borderline useless. Finally, it forces everyone to basically play BL as has been mentioned above, and this causes issues for players like me who like to stick to the fluff, since now to represent IW I basically field BL but without any summoned units or marks, it's still pretty effective, but I just wish I could get tossed a bone in return.

[flintlocklaser]

Why do you hate the Idea of seveal dex's instead of just one.

I hate it because GW basically misled people. If they'd called this codex CSM: Renegades a whole lot of people would have waited to buy CSM: Legions instead (note that I am not one of those people, and would have bought the current "Renegade" dex anyway, so this isn't sour grapes on my part). Having said this, there does seem to be some evidence (refuse posted it in another thread and now I can't find it) that GW actually planned for this codex to be the end-all be-all for 'mortal' chaos in 40k, with the Daemons 'dex to be the only other one. But in that scenario, overwhelming customer dissatisfaction led to the hasty retcon of "oh, we planned for CSM: Legions all along and just decided not to tell you guys, so anyway it will be out next year." One of these scenarios is GW basically conning a lot of players out of their $20 for a codex they wouldn't have bought otherwise; the other scenario speaks to some serious blind spots in the current 40k design team. I'm happy hating either one of these possibilities.

 

Do you not like the idea of better played games were you have to learn to play? OR is it change that you dont like?

Did you mean for this to sound insulting and condescending, or was that a happy accident?

[DeathsHead]

Actually, this codex isn't even really a "Renegades" codex. That's just some claptrap someone came up with to justify its unforgivably dumbed-down homogenity. If it WAS a renegades codex, the models wouldn't look like Chaos Legionnaires, we wouldn't see Night Lords, Iron Warriors, Death Guard, etc. (mis)represented within its pages. We'd see something that was more akin to Space Marines, as opposed to just a simplified version of what we had with the 3.5 Chaos Codex.

 

This codex was a mistake on every front, from a rules perspective (encourages homogenous power-gaming lists), a fluff perspective (streamlining, simplification, lack of depth) and even from the perspective of creating a solid book with good visuals and interesting fluff (inferior illustrations, stupid army-list color schemes, bad lay-out, hastily conceived 2-dimensional fluff designed to rationalize stupid homogenization).

 

It is a terrible half-baked collision of ideas, and I think GW knows it, and is trying to perform damage control on it, by promising us "Legion codices" at some later date (very later)... And what this means, is something more like "Fine, we'll do it right next time". What's so silly and frustrating though is the fact that we'll still be stuck with this ridiculous codex, even when the next one comes out, and it's going to result in some goofy scenarios.

 

"Yeah, I play Death Guard."

 

"Oh yeah? With which codex?"

 

"The Chaos Codex."

 

"Renegades or Legions?"

 

"..."

 

Anyway, I know I wasn't supposed to rant, so I'll try to rationally explain the problem with all of this in just a few sentences: This all has the feeling of a blunder, of blind, thrashing and ill-planning on the part of the designers, and this is almost certain to result in more confusion, more frustration, more problems, and more of a sense of disillusionment on the part of Chaos players anyway. Even when I go to GW stores, I find the GW employees have a quality of sheepish embarassment and frustration at the current condition of the forces of Chaos. Few people I talk to seem to have the feeling that it's possible to realize their various gaming/modelling/army-building ambitions with things as they stand, and releasing a bunch of clumsy stand alone codices will exacerbate this. We all feel let down, and things don't seem to be looking up.

 

Edit: To add something a little more positive to this overwhelmingly negative (yet sincere) critique of mine, I'll explain what I would like to see. I don't think it would really be that impossible to create a Chaos Codex with enough flexibility to create any of the various Chaos Marine forces that have been conceived of in the fluff sofar, be they ancient veterans of the Horus Heresy, a recently corrupted Space Marine chapter, or a conglomeration of various different things. Some would argue, "You can do this with the current codex, just use icons and counts as", but a lot of us aren't satisfied by this because it creates a list with the distinct feeling of..... "I'm pretending that these X are really Y. Please pretend with me." Would it really be that hard to allow enough flexibility to do this, while simultaneously making these different lists actually different from each other in small ways? The old Codex had a really smart system that allowed (anyone with 2 brain cells) to do this, with Veteran Skills and Marks being in seperate but combinable categories. Even though it wasn't hugely useful, Stealth Adept, Counterrattack, Move Through Cover and all of those things were awesome because they added subtle differences to the game. To say that these "complicated things" is.... not true. Further, they weren't very abusable in of themselves. Certainly not as abusable as a Daemon Prince duo with two Lashes of Submission. Similarly, I wish there was a way to give my Independent Characters more.... character. It would be awesome if my Night Lords Hero could have Daemonic Visage! Would this break the game, or take up too much page space? Would this "confuse" small children? NO!

 

Further, it is about time that a Chaos Codex contained a means for the inclusion of the Lost and the Damned in a Chaos Marine list. People have been waiting for this forever, because it is fluffy as hell, allows for an enormous amount of great modelling ideas, and is hardly a power-gamers "no-brainer". Seriously, like two pages of fluff, and another two or three of rules would take care of this sufficiently, without causing anyone's head to explode from "confusion".

 

Lastly, I'd like the codex itself to not feel childish and dumbed down. Less "army color scheme" pictures (total filler!), and less pictures of air-vents on vehicles (?). I'd like better illustrations, more well-conceived fluff, more darkness. Remember how awesome the Eye of Terror codex was to read? I read that stuff, and I get EXCITED about making a Chaos army. I read the stuff in the current dex and I think "Generic evil warriors from mediocre hell".

[Lord_Caerolion]

Thats what I really don't like. Chaos used to be centered around grand, evil schemes, such as the Horus Heresy, and the Black Crusades. What's the big story we get now? Some Red Corsairs capture a single Strike Cruiser. Whoop-de-do...

It moved Chaos away from "We are the things that haunt your nightmares, and will consume your souls!!!" to "yeah, we're basically pirates in space, but with a Satanism streak. Thats about it for us, yeah..."

The whole coolness of the Chaos Marines was that these guys were so feared, everywhere in the galaxy. Now we're just little guys with no supplies, who want to take over your ship, then go burn a single planet, and then get crushed by the Imperial resistance.

And no, I don't hate the idea of several lists instead of just one, I just wish they could have told us first that there was Legions codexes planned, if they were planned at first, or that they could have just implemented the Legions better in this one.

[the jeske]

as others said old dex was full of options [a lot of the weak a lot of the powerful , but that made the character of the book] and different armies . right now chaos armies all look the same 2/3 csm/cult squads , 2dps ,4 oblits , raptors , 2x3 termis done and this makes playing with it and against it boring like hell.

[DeathsHead]

See? Even the Jeske realizes that it's a power-gaming dung factory of boredom!

 

Man, they've really screwed up when both the hard-core gamers and the fluff-heads are irate.

[the jeske]

you get me wrong the chaos dex has a good list [i never said it doesnt have one] , but power gaming iti s not . If I would want to start a real tournament team I would go with 6/8 people 3 eldar , 2 nids 1 IGhellfire or death korps , 1 random [sm gunline , chaos , maybe BA ], 1 black horse lists [necron/tau , water warrior lists , drop pods lists sw or not , maybe another IG , again gun line] . enough people for someone to get most friendly , enough to secure best general and best painted , if its voted by players . 8 is also good because its gas for two cars or one minibus and I would bet a lot of money on the eldar or nids ending up higher then chaos , unless the team really wants to chaos guy to win .

[Morbus]

I would definately love the idea of Codex:Legion

I would not mind if there is only one book for all of the four.

 

Saddest thing for this newest C:CSM is the new players do not even know

about the Mighty Chaos Legions(as there isn't much more than a line here and there) :sick:

 

Hopefully this will be corrected in the(not so far) future

[sonsoftaurus]

I think the current codex is OK, taken on its own merits. But as either a "Renegades" or "Traitor Legion" book it falls short.

 

To quote myself from elsewhere:

 

Absolutely. GW just tosses answers out to deflect whatever criticism comes their way, ignoring reality and previous answers.

 

"Why don't CSM have Land Speeders?"

 

"The CSM are the remnants of the Traitor Legions, before Land Speeders were developed."

 

"But all this pre-heresy fluff includes them."

 

"They can't maintain them, no tech base."

 

"But they can maintain fleets of battleships, Titans, tanks and develop new things like defilers."

 

"Look! New Codex!

 

"OK...hey, where's the special rules for the Traitor Legions?"

 

"This isn't about the Traitor Legions anymore, it's about Renegades."

 

"Oh, so I can just keep using the last codex for my Iron Warriors?"

 

"No, no. This is the new codex for all Chaos Space Marines, with an emphasis on Renegades."

 

"OK, so if these guys are more recent Renegades, where's the options to take more recent equipment like Land Raider Crusaders?"

 

"The Traitor Legions didn't have those."

 

"You just said this was about Renegades!"

 

"It is. See those Renegades on the cover?"

 

"Look like Black Legion to me."

 

"Look! A unicorn!" (runs away)

 

So for me, *as an army list* the current book is fine. But it does not do a good job of representing whatever force GW decides this week it really was meant to represent.

 

I like the Legions. I like DIY full-on Chaos traitors. I like recent renegade SM. I love Lost and the Damned/Traitor Guard. I'm OK with stand-alone daemonic forces, though I doubt I'll use them myself. Most of all, I love the awesome story of Chaos and the Long War, with the myriad forces arrayed against the Imperium, and would like to be able to represent them well.

 

So I would *like* a way to represent the mixed forces that so often appear in fluff. Traitor guardsmen/cultists supported by mutant monstrosities, driving captured imperial equipment/custom mechanical monstrosities, summoning dark denizens of the warp and being led by powerful psychics and/or traitor astartes. Not just spiky marines. Not just daemons. Not just spiky IG. The Lost and the Damned list, though it had limitations, let you do this, and it was beloved by me and many others. It was the Chaos equivalent of the Imperial mixed-forces lists (IG/WH/DH). A LatD army battling IG with WH and/or DH support would be my ideal 40K experience from a background standpoint.

 

So I don't mind seperate books. I'd just like some decent ways - outside of Apocalypse - to mix the various Chaos elements officially so I can take them to tournaments, play with new people more easily, etc. Renegades book done as actual renegades, halfway between loyalists and full-on Chaos? Sure! Traitor Legions/CSM? Sure! Mutant Hordes/Traitor Guard/Cults? Heck yeah! Daemonworld armies? OK. Don't care for it as a standalone, but not going to complain. Ways to combine Rens or Traitors + LatD + Daemons? Yes, please!

 

That's what I would really like out of Chaos.

 

While it did not affect my own armies (aside from LatD) too terribly, I also feel sorry for those who had nifty themed armies that don't translate over well to the new book or just play very counter-intuitively. The various -wing lists that now need to add some PA marines in. The full-on cult lists that lose sonic havocs/terms, 'cult' terminators that are now more easily frightened than PA cult troops (not fearless), Nurgle PA PMs being in many ways tougher than Nurgle termies who don't get FNP, Khornate termies that have lower WS than PA zerkers, etc.

 

Top it off with some poor editing/writing/balancing, which were some of the big problems with the *last* codex.

 

It's different, and as I've said - on its own it's OK. But in many respects it feels like a step back, not forwards.

[refuse]

I have noticed that people seem to hate the new codexes that are coming out. If what I have heard is true and GW is going to make a list for the different aspects of Chaos would not this provide more play options. I realize that there have been codex out there were you could min/max everything and anything. But would it not be a lot more enjoyable to have one list for the lower sm lists, one for demons, one for cults and one for Black Crusades (legion list). If done right each list would have its own play styles.

Ok, besides the content, I think one issue (not a rant) is that the new codecies are going back towards 2nd edition (look at the layout). This has advantages and disadvantages.

The advantage is that the second half of the book has the rules, the first half has the fluff. This allowed GW to publish the BA codex in two issues of WD, and you really only need the 2nd issue to play. It kind of works in the Codex format in that you only flip through half the book. This kind of worked in the DA book (I don't like format, but I can understand it).

 

Now for Chaos, they broke it. They have rules in the fluff section (i.e. Marks of Chaos) so it isn't easy to read.

 

So GW is heading towards 2nd (if you look at 5th edition rules, many of them are 2nd edition rules, and Apoc is a huge inclusion of 2nd edition fluff/rules (virus grenades. . . )). Now the other issue with the new codecies is that in 2nd, the back of the books included alternate lists. i.e. different layouts to make different armies. Genestealer Cult, Daemon armies. The reason they could do this, was there was no FOC back in 2nd. So changing what counts as what was an easy way to make alternate lists (over powered or not). This worked for the edition and allowed alternate lists to be built. Now with 3rd, and the changes to FOC, we need alternate lists defined for us. They did this to separate 40k from Fantasy.

 

Now, to your point. The Powers that be, have said (taken with a grain of salt) they don't want the exact thing you are describing. They don't want a bunch of lists. If you want to play something non-standard, play APOC. This means, that C:CSM as it exists will be the only Tourney Legal Chaos List for 4th/5th. Any list they publish they will support going forward. So Kroot Mercenaries, LatD, Speed Freaks, Salamanders, Genestealer Cult and other armies will be Apoc only. So the three statements from GW, taken together create a paradox. They planned Legions all along while not planning to do sub-lists, and the C:CSM represents all aspects of Chaos, even though they were planning daemons and Legions.

 

Would it be more enjoyable to have alot of books? Yes, I would think so if they were planned out well. And better buisness for GW. C:Chaos with base lists for $20. C:Daemons which requires C:Chaos for $10. C:CSM renegades which requires C:SM and C:CSM for $10. C:Legions for $20 listing all 9 legions, but requires C:CSM for CSM legions, and C:SM for loyalists. C:Latd which requires C:Chaos, and C:Imperial Guard. And so on. But they kind of did that in 2nd, and people didn't like having to carry 2-3 books around (not including the original BBB). But to me, it made sense. They create the base balanced list, and release a "composite" list for a few bucks more. That way you buy what you want, you pay a little more but still. But that doesn't work for GW because they change the base rules so often, they have to re-release the books for each release (or the next depending on the cycle). So some armies, like the Dark Eldar are never updated for releases.

 

I realize that when the new SM Chaos Codex came out that the local Chaos guys hated it but most have started to enjoy the new aspect and changes that it has provided. I think they will enjoy Chaos a lot if GW comes out with several Codexes’ for them with different themes.

I think they will to. Though the need for several, or "large ones" is immaterial. GW use to do Chaos and all the chaos legions in big books (Slaves to Darkness). So two major books, one focusing on Cult and one on Legions would work. Or even one book with Khorne/Slaanesh and some C:CSM legions, and one on Nurgle/Tzeentch and some C:CSM legions would be cool.

Though if we wait for 2+ years for the first book, we are headed towards 40k V6 by the time the last one ships. Invalidating many of the books. More books = more invalidation when a new revision comes out. This again is due to GW' policy of massive shifts in the game, not incremental changes. If they did incremental changes, codecies may be valid 2-3 releases, allowing them to support more armies without the need to update them for every release, do to major shifts in the underlying game system.

 

Please no rants. Why do you hate the Idea of seveal dex's instead of just one. Do you not like the idea of better played games were you have to learn to play? OR is it change that you dont like? What would you like to see come?

I like the idea of several Dexes. It promotes profitability to GW for the subcult/sublists (i.e. I have no problem paying an extra $10 so I can play my Emperor's Children). But it is directly counter to their method of product release. i.e. By changing the base game system every 2-4 years, they need to release all the codecies every 2-3 years. So some codecies are never updated for a revision. i.e. if the Current Ork codex was written with V5 in mind, the Orks never had a V4 codex as the last one was written for V3. So while I may want subcult/sublist codecies, they are the first to be "delayed" or ignored. i.e. Daemon Hunter, Witch Hunter, LatD, Salamanders books are not scheduled or planned to be updated for 4th, or even 5th which is shipping this year. Dark Eldar, Orks never had a version 4.0 codex (assuming Orks are designed for 5th).

 

Do I like the idea of learning to play? Or don't I. I like having a large learning curve. This doesn't imply complex rules (as chess highlights) in implies tight rules with well thought out implications.

I think the issue is GW's inability to determine scale. There is no entry level skirmish rules. All rules are for the current 1850 pt games. So new players have a steep curve to get up to speed, and they require a major investment to get into the game. I would like to see Skirmish, tactical, and strategic versions of the rules. Kill team level (or 40k complex rules), tactical rules, and strategic (Apoc) level rules. Not have them all shoe horned together into one ruleset that becomes poor at every level.

[Dammeron]

It's rather difficult as a dyed in the wool, "Slaughtering Since The Age of Six-Years-Old" Chaos player to comment on the current Chaos Space Marine Codex without ranting. Personally, I thought GW had hit its nadir with C:CSM Third Edition (basically a pamphlet that hardly even mentioned the Chaos Gods and was purportedly phoned in for production by writer Jervis Johnson), then I sat down to read the latest incarnation.

 

My initial reaction was utter surprise that, rather than taking what had been established in the previous codex (V:3.5) and refining it (i.e. imposing statutory limits on the number of Daemonic Gifts any one model could take, limiting application of Veteran Skills), baby had been thrown out with the bath water, simply removing any and all opportunities for customisation from the equation. This certainly did not sit well with one who principally plays the game for its background, especially since over the last half a decade or so, GW had embarked on an extended campaign of elaborating said background via the Index Astartes articles, Index Xenos, Black Library publications such as the Liber Chaotica etc, as well as attempting to reflect that background within the gaming mechanics with alternate lists representing divergant Chaos Legions, Craftworlds, Imperial Guard regiments, etc.

 

Don't get me wrong; I think that it's entirely possible to represent a wide variety of different armies from a single, adaptable army list (the existing Space Marine, Eldar and Tyranid codicies are pretty superb examples), it's just that the current incarnation of the Chaos Space Marine codex fails miserably in this regard, effectively invalidating armies created from the Alpha Legion and Word Bearers divergant lists in the last Codex, whilst sapping armies such as the Night Lords and Iron warriors of all individuality and flavour.

 

Then there are the mealy-mouthed, politicking justifications that spew from GW's P.R. department concernign what is quite fast becoming one of the company's most un-popular publications to date:

 

"Oh, maybe we should have been more clear; this isn't Codex: Chaos Space Marines. It's Codex: Renegades. Those players wishing to field an army of one of the traditional Traitor Legions will get their own army lists in time."

 

Well, if that's the case, why do these "renegades" use the antiquated weaponry (Reaper Auto-Cannons, Combi-bolters etc) of the Traitor Legions? What happened to their Plasma Cannons, Multi-Meltas and Landspeeders?

 

This is of course after the official announcements (via White Dwarf articles written by author Gav Thorpe himself) that this is the only all-singing, all-dancing list Chaos players in general (Traitors, Renegades or regardless) are going to get.

 

The general impression is of a "work" that had the bare minimum of time or attention paid to it, produced merely as a stop-gap between the time of release and that of Codex: Orcs and various other projects.

 

It's insulting, especially to those of us who have dedicated a great deal of time, money and (most importantly to my way of thinking) creative energy to the hobby, whom I think you will find the vast majority of the disenfranchised consist of.

[Arschbombe]

Some very good commentary in this thread so far.

 

The Powers that be, have said (taken with a grain of salt) they don't want the exact thing you are describing. They don't want a bunch of lists.

 

Would it be more enjoyable to have alot of books? Yes, I would think so if they were planned out well.

 

More books = more invalidation when a new revision comes out.

 

I like the idea of several Dexes. It promotes profitability to GW for the subcult/sublists (i.e. I have no problem paying an extra $10 so I can play my Emperor's Children). But it is directly counter to their method of product release. i.e. By changing the base game system every 2-4 years, they need to release all the codecies every 2-3 years. So some codecies are never updated for a revision.

 

I think all of these thoughts point to the fundamental design problems of the GW business model: the fractured rules and their subordination to the primary mission of selling models. The rules for 40k are spread across a slew of codices, all of varying levels of currency with the main rules and thus open to varying degrees of abuse. It's clear from this that the integrity of the rules are not a priority for GW. The codices serve as revenue generators on their own and also as catalysts for new model purchases.

 

The codex system is broken. GW knows it, but is unlikely to change. Instead they tweak at the margins removing the variant lists in order to reduce the scope of the problem. Chaos and Orks are the new way with Space Marines and IG rumored to follow in the same streamlined vein.

 

They should release all of the army lists in a single volume. They should be a part of the main rulebook or in a standalone army list book. Every player should be able to have all the rules to 40k without having to shell out $300+ for all the codices. If they did that the variant lists wouldn't be a problem.

[Brother Nicolas]

Hay just want to thanks for all the feed back on what people thing. Glad it didnt become a rant, Love the replys.

[Aarhus]

This whole debacle of a codex is a very odd quandry.

 

It's a horribly poor design because the community (overall) gave very poor advice to GW on what needed to be changed because there were too many poor sportsmen who took the Chaos codex, and basically used their opponents as toilet paper.

 

If it weren't for people abusing C:CSM 3.5, (and it was, in my opinion, THE most abused 'dex at the time), the public wouldn't have been 'abused' by C:CSM 4.

 

I still don't understand the unforgivable amount of GW hate that's going around. I understood it at the beginning because I didn't like the book, but, as with "teh intarwebs" you'll get a lot of mouth-breathers who really don't know what they want.

Besides, EVEN WITH solutions on the way, there's still a (depressingly) vocal amount of people who are so jaded and cynical, that because C:CSM4 was so bad, there's no possible redemption.

Sure, there's legit GW hate, and that comes from Slaanesh and Alpha Legion players, but a good amount of it is "awww, I can't have S6 I5 A5 on-the-charge squad leaders anymore!". Or other ways of cutting down the power-gaming edge that the 3.5ed codex had in spades.

However, there are solutions coming, and there are things those players can do in the meantime. ('Counts as' is great for this!)

 

However, it IS "teh intarwebs", so you really have to take The Doomsayers opinions with a grain (or shakers worth) of salt.

 

 

Cheers,

Lawrence.

[DeathsHead]

It's a horribly poor design because the community (overall) gave very poor advice to GW on what needed to be changed because there were too many poor sportsmen who took the Chaos codex, and basically used their opponents as toilet paper.

 

If it weren't for people abusing C:CSM 3.5, (and it was, in my opinion, THE most abused 'dex at the time), the public wouldn't have been 'abused' by C:CSM 4

 

Unfortunately, there is a good amount of truth in this. Part of the problem is that gamers themselves often lack.... the integrity, creativity, self-esteem or passion to really do justice to the game itself. C:CSM 3.5 was so awesome in its wide array of customizability, but people just ended up abusing it to create cookie cutter lists. The same thing still goes on now. I see people ask "What's the best build for X army?" and right away a bunch of dorks jump up and advise this misguided person to make a list with two winged Daemon princes, five of this, none of that, etc.

 

This isn't going to change, though. This is just the way "gamers" are. I've encountered this enough even in table-top roleplaying games to simply realize that a lot of people have what I view as a character flaw, and are kind of missing the point of the various games they play (massive, interactive, living stories told through multiple mediums). Ugly as all of this is, though, GW needs to stop trying to police this behavior, because it just ends up punishing those of us who DO 'get it' along with everyone else. And it doesn't stop anyone anyway.

[Celestial Dragon King]

It's a horribly poor design because the community (overall) gave very poor advice to GW on what needed to be changed because there were too many poor sportsmen who took the Chaos codex, and basically used their opponents as toilet paper.

 

If it weren't for people abusing C:CSM 3.5, (and it was, in my opinion, THE most abused 'dex at the time), the public wouldn't have been 'abused' by C:CSM 4

 

Unfortunately, there is a good amount of truth in this. Part of the problem is that gamers themselves often lack.... the integrity, creativity, self-esteem or passion to really do justice to the game itself. C:CSM 3.5 was so awesome in its wide array of customizability, but people just ended up abusing it to create cookie cutter lists. The same thing still goes on now. I see people ask "What's the best build for X army?" and right away a bunch of dorks jump up and advise this misguided person to make a list with two winged Daemon princes, five of this, none of that, etc.

 

This isn't going to change, though. This is just the way "gamers" are. I've encountered this enough even in table-top roleplaying games to simply realize that a lot of people have what I view as a character flaw, and are kind of missing the point of the various games they play (massive, interactive, living stories told through multiple mediums). Ugly as all of this is, though, GW needs to stop trying to police this behavior, because it just ends up punishing those of us who DO 'get it' along with everyone else. And it doesn't stop anyone anyway.

 

I disagree some. I think it's also the nature of playing a game. Playing a game (table top, roleplay, football, baseball, etc) involves having a winner and a loser. Everyone wants to be be a winner. Even when playing against friends. And even someone who makes the coolest fluffy list will get discouraged if they keep loosing because there fluffy list has flaws to keep it from winning. And then there is the other end of the spectrum that only makes lists to win and be damned that it makes any kind of sense fluff wise. I guess I'm trying to say that just by being a game it attracts people that are "win at all costs" types. You can't police that, ever. All you can do is try to make a good game that makes it hard to do that. I think GW has too much almost the mentality that all players are going to make nice balanced fluffy lists when many will not. It also doesn't come up in their play testing. They need a least one guy whose job is to try and abuse the codex before they finalise it.