Gav Thorpe on Codex Chaos

[incinerator950]

Still, I would like to see the numbers besides a few veteran's opinions that are angry (I share their anger)

m8 first of all , a lot of people left the game . 2-3 years ago you had post about EC/IW/DG every army +DIY renagades every day. take a look how good the slanesh sub forum or tzeench sub forum is doing now . sometimes its 2 days without any posts . Also if someone is new [and GW is kind of a building their whole sales tactic around it] and never saw or played with 3.5 dex or the dex of that era , how can he know what are we angry about ? what can he or she know about how the game looked back then . Even more , how can they know that the Gav dex looks very much like a copy past of the 3ed JJ chaos dex [ the most hated dex ever , sharing the crown with old thorpe dark elfs].

 

I'm aware of this Jeske, I was stating the current mindset of the forum, mostly the Chaos players. If I wanted to make a huge Counter for the internet I would have done so already.

 

I am very well aware that a large portion of the chaos players either shelved their armies, quit the hobby, sold their army to start a better one, or are playing the new dex.

[IanV]

So what hurts more? That you've lost some of your individuality or your firepower?

 

I mean are you guys still competitive? (I don't play that much, I'm more of a painter)

[Atheist]

I am most annoyed by the 2 DP's in the same list .

 

0-1 Chaos Lord , or Chaos Sorcerer Lord , or Daemon Prince

 

This unique ( in every list ) hero of the Dark powers could choose to have a sidekick . It was called lieutenant back then .

 

Now it isn't even possible in any meaningfull way , just because the most expensive unit ( points-wise ) would be the mortal lord ( if he is to do something other than being 100+ pts spent in any list ) . The daemon prince is a quite powerfull choice cheaper and more effective than the average lord . Now it would seem that the lieutenant would need about 150 pts compared to the 130 points of a DP , "lieutenant counts as "out of the window .

 

I honestly believe that the errata allowed winged ( mortal ) chaos lords/sorcerers to get inside a transport , just as a rules-incentive for players to field a lord instead of a DP . I mean , it was a christmas present . I see no reason not to cry "cheese " at this rule . Why model a lord with a jumppack then , if for the same points I get " the-super-versatile-jump-pack-that-is-not-actually-a-jumppack-except-that-I-move-like-having-one " ?

 

Have you ever given this faq rule some thought ? I would enjoy a similar "bike-that-is-not-actually-a-bike-only-you-may-move-as-a-bike-if-you-want-to" . Heh .

 

How I miss the old codex ...

[IanV]

Hmmm, I see....

 

So basically when the new dex came out, a lot of your models and their wargear were rendered illegal and therefore useless.

 

Somebody should do an article about the history of the codices. Not just chaos but everyone. It would make for a very interesting read.

 

Chaos traitors, you have my sympathy.

 

- IanV

 

PS. At least you guys still have the coolest looking models... arguably with the most potential for conversion and frikin' amazing paintjobs.

[eyescrossed]

Hmmm, I see....

 

So basically when the new dex came out, a lot of your models and their wargear were rendered illegal and therefore useless.

 

Somebody should do an article about the history of the codices. Not just chaos but everyone. It would make for a very interesting read.

 

Chaos traitors, you have my sympathy.

 

- IanV

 

PS. At least you guys still have the coolest looking models... arguably with the most potential for conversion and frikin' amazing paintjobs.

It's not really that, it's just that the army lost so much of its flavour.

 

Like others said, imagine if all the Space Marine Chapters were in one book, with no special rules or characters to make the army different from the standard one.

As in, no Vulkan, no Lysander, etc, or they didn't change things (like Pedro making Sternguard scoring).

 

Imagine how bland it would be.

[incinerator950]

I am most annoyed by the 2 DP's in the same list .

 

0-1 Chaos Lord , or Chaos Sorcerer Lord , or Daemon Prince

 

This unique ( in every list ) hero of the Dark powers could choose to have a sidekick . It was called lieutenant back then .

 

Now it isn't even possible in any meaningfull way , just because the most expensive unit ( points-wise ) would be the mortal lord ( if he is to do something other than being 100+ pts spent in any list ) . The daemon prince is a quite powerfull choice cheaper and more effective than the average lord . Now it would seem that the lieutenant would need about 150 pts compared to the 130 points of a DP , "lieutenant counts as "out of the window .

 

I honestly believe that the errata allowed winged ( mortal ) chaos lords/sorcerers to get inside a transport , just as a rules-incentive for players to field a lord instead of a DP . I mean , it was a christmas present . I see no reason not to cry "cheese " at this rule . Why model a lord with a jumppack then , if for the same points I get " the-super-versatile-jump-pack-that-is-not-actually-a-jumppack-except-that-I-move-like-having-one " ?

 

Have you ever given this faq rule some thought ? I would enjoy a similar "bike-that-is-not-actually-a-bike-only-you-may-move-as-a-bike-if-you-want-to" . Heh .

 

How I miss the old codex ...

 

I like it, I applied it to my Sorc. Also, alot of us miss Doom Rider and Cypher.

[Rain]

Wait, people actually miss Doomrider? He was one of the worst characters ever as far as I know, they must have been on something really adulterated when they wrote his rules.

 

"Hey so Frank, what in the list really kind of sucks?"

 

"Bikes! But wait, can't you use their champions as daemonhosts?"

 

"Right, so our character won't do that, instead we will give him a jump pack rule...that's a bike . Oh and just to make sure he isn't viable let's make a rule where you have to summon him so you never know if he will ever show up and when he does let's make another rule that makes him disappear before he can do anything, not that he would otherwise."

 

"George you are a genius, drinks are on me tonight"

 

At least they ameliorated that debacle of a codex with the IA articles, now we have nothing.

[Messanger of Death]

I can remember just before deciding to collect Black Templars toying with the idea of going Chaos... specifically Iron Warriors. They just oozed character and reading about Christian Bryans collection in White Dwarf made them seem all the more cooler. However, with the release of the new Chaos codex they lost alot of their character and just seemed like the Legions and the cults were no more.

 

The current codex looks and feels like it was made for renegades... just seems like it is a Codex: Space Marines with a bit of chaos added. Pick a viable army list and paint it your own unique colour and then make up some background info. Doesn't seem all that different to the loyalist way of doing it.

 

I truly feel sorry for those who play Chaos and especially those who have moved on to use other codices to 'count-as' an army. Can see alot of followers of the Blood God using C: Space Wolves just to get the close combat feel.

 

Messanger

[BrotherLoki]

For those complaining about the greater versatility of the loyalist, Imperial guard and Space Wolves books I would put money down that they have these characteristics specifically because the chaos book was poorly received. The direction the design team wanted to take the game at the time, was for a more rules light version - as typified by the Chaos Space Marines and Dark Angels books. However that appeared to be at odds with how the existing players wanted it. So they changed their approach. Bearing in mind that the development of a codex from initial planning to release is supposed to take over 2 years, we're only just starting to see the results of the feedback to Codex:CSM (released in summer 2007 iirc) informing the most recent designs - IG and SW.

 

The point I'm trying to make is that I honestly believe the designers HAVE listened to the complaints and taken them into account. They have adjusted the projects they have done since accordingly. They may even have done it straight away - It's widely rumoured that the 2008 loyalist marine codex was originally developed as codex ultramarines just like 2nd edition (hence the focus on them in the fluff sections) and that the named characters to modify the army builds were added in late in the design process - I would speculate after codex chaos came out. It's entirely possible that a lot of the extra wargear was added back in a similar way due to the complaints about not having the armoury - hellfire rounds, auxiliary grenade launchers etc.

 

The thing is though, they can't fix it magically overnight - the changes people seemed to be demanding would be too extensive for a simple errata. Even if they'd put a new chaos codex back on the schedule the day after the last one came out, it would still take 2 years to come out, and they would have had to bump another army to do it, which would have been deeply unfair to the others. However I bet it's back on the schedule by now - so that maybe there'll be a 3-4 year gap rather than the 5-6 years it might otherwise have been. Either that, or we may yet see the Legion books which have long been rumoured, and which Gav alluded to in his blog post. Furthermore, it is GW's business model that codexes must support miniature releases, so maybe they're waiting for the next lot of chaos plastics to be developed or something.

[incinerator950]

Legatus, you do realize the majority of Chaos players don't use a custom warband and actually play the Legion, right?

 

I'm not getting this lack of options outside of the Legions for 3.5 you mentioned, I had more things to do with it then I do now.

[eyescrossed]

Legatus, you do realize the majority of Chaos players don't use a custom warband and actually play the Legion, right?

 

I'm not getting this lack of options outside of the Legions for 3.5 you mentioned, I had more things to do with it then I do now.

Hell, I only play a custom warband because World Eaters (in THIS codex) are blander than a piece of paper.

[Grey Mage]

For those complaining about the greater versatility of the loyalist, Imperial guard and Space Wolves books I would put money down that they have these characteristics specifically because the chaos book was poorly received. The direction the design team wanted to take the game at the time, was for a more rules light version - as typified by the Chaos Space Marines and Dark Angels books. However that appeared to be at odds with how the existing players wanted it. So they changed their approach. Bearing in mind that the development of a codex from initial planning to release is supposed to take over 2 years, we're only just starting to see the results of the feedback to Codex:CSM (released in summer 2007 iirc) informing the most recent designs - IG and SW.

 

The point I'm trying to make is that I honestly believe the designers HAVE listened to the complaints and taken them into account. They have adjusted the projects they have done since accordingly. They may even have done it straight away - It's widely rumoured that the 2008 loyalist marine codex was originally developed as codex ultramarines just like 2nd edition (hence the focus on them in the fluff sections) and that the named characters to modify the army builds were added in late in the design process - I would speculate after codex chaos came out. It's entirely possible that a lot of the extra wargear was added back in a similar way due to the complaints about not having the armoury - hellfire rounds, auxiliary grenade launchers etc.

 

The thing is though, they can't fix it magically overnight - the changes people seemed to be demanding would be too extensive for a simple errata. Even if they'd put a new chaos codex back on the schedule the day after the last one came out, it would still take 2 years to come out, and they would have had to bump another army to do it, which would have been deeply unfair to the others. However I bet it's back on the schedule by now - so that maybe there'll be a 3-4 year gap rather than the 5-6 years it might otherwise have been. Either that, or we may yet see the Legion books which have long been rumoured, and which Gav alluded to in his blog post. Furthermore, it is GW's business model that codexes must support miniature releases, so maybe they're waiting for the next lot of chaos plastics to be developed or something.

This is actually a really intersting concept,and the more I think about it the more accurate I think it is. It does little to aleive the current problem, but it does explain the strange "hickup" that occurred in the year I was armyless and thus not paying attention.

 

Legatus, your arguing about the Iron Warriors with Iron Winds, who is one of the Administrators on the Iron Warriors forum. I think he knows quite a bit more about what makes a good Iron Warriors army then you. You seem to have an almost non exisitant grasp on the concept of 40k and the rules themselves, because frankly a lot of your arguements are about as sturdy as a wall made from used tissue paper.

I think you dont have a grasp of Legatus- he chose his name well, and he will argue this to hell and back *ironic in chaos forum, no?* sometimes just to play devils advocate. Disregarding certain peices of fluff that dont fit into his vision is just another debate tactic, and a common one at that.

 

Legatus, you do realize the majority of Chaos players don't use a custom warband and actually play the Legion, right?

 

I'm not getting this lack of options outside of the Legions for 3.5 you mentioned, I had more things to do with it then I do now.

Hell, I only play a custom warband because World Eaters (in THIS codex) are blander than a piece of paper.

Wich is sad is it not? Personally I feel its things like this that are the real indicator of how badly done this book is- not wether or not it can be competitive, not wether or not it there are a million+1 builds in it, but simply the fact that it stopped speaking to the hearts of the people who liked it before.

 

Because as we tell all the newbies- pick an army you like in the fluffy... because rules come and go, but the fluff remains.

 

Well this time around they forgot to put the fluff in too... and now we have alot of missing chaos players. I dont think thats a coincidence legatus. I really dont.

[eyescrossed]

Hell, I only play a custom warband because World Eaters (in THIS codex) are blander than a piece of paper.

Wich is sad is it not? Personally I feel its things like this that are the real indicator of how badly done this book is- not wether or not it can be competitive, not wether or not it there are a million+1 builds in it, but simply the fact that it stopped speaking to the hearts of the people who liked it before.

 

Because as we tell all the newbies- pick an army you like in the fluffy... because rules come and go, but the fluff remains.

 

Well this time around they forgot to put the fluff in too... and now we have alot of missing chaos players. I dont think thats a coincidence legatus. I really dont.

I would've loved to make a World Eaters force - I was going to convert Angron up, even, but now, I really don't want to.

 

Actually, I guess I could make a Pre-Heresy army.

 

*Evil plan begins to form*

[Captain Idaho]

For those complaining about the greater versatility of the loyalist, Imperial guard and Space Wolves books I would put money down that they have these characteristics specifically because the chaos book was poorly received. The direction the design team wanted to take the game at the time, was for a more rules light version - as typified by the Chaos Space Marines and Dark Angels books. However that appeared to be at odds with how the existing players wanted it. So they changed their approach. Bearing in mind that the development of a codex from initial planning to release is supposed to take over 2 years, we're only just starting to see the results of the feedback to Codex:CSM (released in summer 2007 iirc) informing the most recent designs - IG and SW.

 

The point I'm trying to make is that I honestly believe the designers HAVE listened to the complaints and taken them into account. They have adjusted the projects they have done since accordingly. They may even have done it straight away - It's widely rumoured that the 2008 loyalist marine codex was originally developed as codex ultramarines just like 2nd edition (hence the focus on them in the fluff sections) and that the named characters to modify the army builds were added in late in the design process - I would speculate after codex chaos came out. It's entirely possible that a lot of the extra wargear was added back in a similar way due to the complaints about not having the armoury - hellfire rounds, auxiliary grenade launchers etc.

 

The thing is though, they can't fix it magically overnight - the changes people seemed to be demanding would be too extensive for a simple errata. Even if they'd put a new chaos codex back on the schedule the day after the last one came out, it would still take 2 years to come out, and they would have had to bump another army to do it, which would have been deeply unfair to the others. However I bet it's back on the schedule by now - so that maybe there'll be a 3-4 year gap rather than the 5-6 years it might otherwise have been. Either that, or we may yet see the Legion books which have long been rumoured, and which Gav alluded to in his blog post. Furthermore, it is GW's business model that codexes must support miniature releases, so maybe they're waiting for the next lot of chaos plastics to be developed or something.

 

This is actually a really intersting concept,and the more I think about it the more accurate I think it is. It does little to aleive the current problem, but it does explain the strange "hickup" that occurred in the year I was armyless and thus not paying attention.

 

 

Indeed, that's what I said a few pages back :devil:

[Brother Sutek]

+++ Played DA's until the lastest codex...played AL until the latest codex...same for EC. DG can still work but the build I have to use is boring and has alot of melta spam and 2 warptime DP in it, not something people tend to enjoy playing against week after week. When I first read the DA and C:CSM codex I got the feeling that GW hated me and was punishing me for loving the game, now thanks to Gav I know it's selfish and stupid of me to think my view of 40K is valid and that whatever they spoon/force feed me is better and more fun than anything they released before and any "fans" should shut up and stop being so darn annoying. Not to worry I've switched over my DA's to vanilla marines and most of my other chaos marines are going to be SW's. This is how I show them I got the point of using my "imagination" to have my models "count as" something that will have more than 2 optimal builds. Sorry to sound bitter my play group has has a huge surge of IG, SW and SM and almost no one plays anything else anymore and it's made me a bit grumpy.

[traitor_dice]

in 4th ed, before the current chaos codex came out I was seriously considering starting a chaos army (1k sons). I'd already bought a lord and 20 CSM.

 

a few months later the new codex came out. i didnt even buy it, i looked at it in the store and gave up then and there. you might say i should have given it a shot or whatever, but after reading it i didnt want to. it had pretty much every reason i wanted to try chaos removed (no legions, very little cult specific gear, no daemons, no marked vehicles, and the cult troops and cult armies as a whole got totally nerfed/removed.)

 

since reading it, I haven't done a thing with said CSM. and until a new (better) codex is realeased, im not going to.

[Sovereign]

Personally, I'm OK with the current CSM book. My CSM concept is pre-Heretic Marines, meaning Space Marines that are on the cusp of committing Heresy.

 

For what I want to do, it's a very good book.

[satanaka]

Personally, I'm OK with the current CSM book. My CSM concept is pre-Heretic Marines, meaning Space Marines that are on the cusp of committing Heresy.

 

For what I want to do, it's a very good book.

 

And no one is saying it isn't a good book for what you intend to do. That's not the issue.

 

The issue is it doesn't represent the Legions very well, and most armies have the same old spam lists you see every day.

 

The highest issue is for those like myself and Traitor Dice that want to run very fluffy lists for our respective legions and can not due to the new codex's layout and options. We want to run our armies the old way, under the previous codex again, but currently can not, as the current codex's rules now supersede the old codex.

[Sovereign]

The issue is it doesn't represent the Legions very well, and most armies have the same old spam lists you see every day.

OK, I'll bite - precisely what can't either of you do?

 

As above, he wanted to play kSons, so...

1. Does his kSons list lack the ability to take large numbers of kSons as Troops, under MoT Sorcorer / DP command?

2. Are his kSons not distinguished in some way from unmarked / Marked / non-Tz Cult CSM?

3. Did the kSons lose anything that they would have been expected to have fielded in 2E, the 40k3 RB, or original 40k3 Codex?

 

Because the first is the most important, and the current book does that. The second is also important, and again, this requirement is also met. The last, I believe, is also met. So there don't appear to be any obvious problems.

 

What I see you guys are getting hung up on is a lack of "chrome" - detail for the sake of detail, and rules for the sake of rules. Stuff which is, ultimately, bad design.

 

That is, if you didn't have a preconceived notion based on the previous CSM book, there wouldn't be any issue with the current one.

____

 

Forgot to comment on the spam lists - you know, nothing in the book mandates a cookie-cutter spam list. Just because players are playing it, that's no reason not to be a little original and do your own thing.

[traitor_dice]

Forgot to comment on the spam lists - you know, nothing in the book mandates a cookie-cutter spam list. Just because players are playing it, that's no reason not to be a little original and do your own thing.

 

thats the problem, every list ends up being the same thing. sure, you can spam 1K sons, take a sorcerer etc, but in the end it just doesn't have enough flavour to it.

 

its like saying that because the new SM codex has a master of the forge, it now represents Iron Hands accurately, but it doesn't.

[satanaka]

The issue is it doesn't represent the Legions very well, and most armies have the same old spam lists you see every day.

OK, I'll bite - precisely what can't either of you do?

 

As above, he wanted to play kSons, so...

1. Does his kSons list lack the ability to take large numbers of kSons as Troops, under MoT Sorcerer / DP command?

2. Are his kSons not distinguished in some way from unmarked / Marked / non-Tz Cult CSM?

3. Did the kSons lose anything that they would have been expected to have fielded in 2E, the 40k3 RB, or original 40k3 Codex?

 

Because the first is the most important, and the current book does that. The second is also important, and again, this requirement is also met. The last, I believe, is also met. So there don't appear to be any obvious problems.

 

What I see you guys are getting hung up on is a lack of "chrome" - detail for the sake of detail, and rules for the sake of rules. Stuff which is, ultimately, bad design.

 

That is, if you didn't have a preconceived notion based on the previous CSM book, there wouldn't be any issue with the current one.

____

 

Forgot to comment on the spam lists - you know, nothing in the book mandates a cookie-cutter spam list. Just because players are playing it, that's no reason not to be a little original and do your own thing.

 

Ok let's examine exactly what all he lost in the changing of the codices.

 

1.) MoT for UNITS. The current icons are a stupid idea to begin with, unless you're playing a renegade army or BL, especially if you are talking about playing a cult army such as the TSons or DG. Units should be able to be MARKED for the big 4.

2.) The ability to field Tsons Termies. The upgrade cost was +18 per model. Was it THAT hard to add two lines of wording to the Tsons entry to allow for Tsons termies?

3.) Vehicles being allowed to take the upgrade Coruscating Flame. The upgrade had existed since the 2nd Ed. codex, thus making the answer to your 3rd question a resounding "Yes!!!!". I see no reason to have gotten rid of it, and it was quite useful. Not to mention the flavor it added to a Tsons army.

4.) The Blasted Standard. Not only was it an icon for summoning, it could do damage itself.

5.) The ability to summon Tzeentch - specific daemons. Lesser daemons are ok, but the Tzeentch daemons were very fluffy. Daemons SHOULD NEVER have been separated into their own codex, as they were still troops under the last codex and it was possible to run a solely daemon list using that book. With the addition of the new daemon units to the Marine codex, it would be quite possible to run both lists in one book and charge $5 extra bucks for it.

 

Now let's see what I lost.

 

1.)Cultists. There is NO equivalent in the current codex.

2.)Units of said cultists having either the scout skill set, the assassin one, or the saboteurs skill set. Getting infiltrate was great, and having either move through cover, furious charge, or siege specialists with it was just icing on the cake.

 

Now granted, I lost a lot less list wise than he did, but what was lost affected my army far more than it affected the Tsons. It totally changed how my army worked, in addition to leaving me with only half an army, due to AL players depending on those cultists, and a whole bunch of models I couldn't even use anymore (they're still packed away to this day.)

 

But needless to say, BOTH armies were made unviable, due to the new crap codex, that was as I see it, undertested, poorly written, and an utter failure, based on the previous high standards the Chaos codex was held to.

 

Concerning "my preconceived notion", I was well aware of what was in the 2nd ed. codex, before 3.0 came out. I thought 3.0 was trash also, just like I do 4.0, but not for the same reason. I thought it was trash due to the fact the book lost a lot of fluff, something that made the 2ed book what it was. I was quite glad to see 3.5 correct this and was quite excited to see things in it that myself and my friends had talked about back in 2nd that would be good for Chaos. It had felt like we had been listened to, understood and heard. The current codex is a slap in the face and feels like a reversion to even beyond what the 3.0 codex was like.

 

Do not get me wrong, I am all for streamlining the system. However, there should have been a fine line between streamlining and gutting a great product because you just don't give a crap, like when this book was written.

 

Now as for list spamming, I suggest you take a look at the army list section of these boards and see how many lists look TOTALLY IDENTICAL, yet are supposedly different Legions.

[the jeske]

1. Does his kSons list lack the ability to take large numbers of kSons as Troops, under MoT Sorcorer / DP command?

well the list is unplayable. so it kind of a depands on how you look at it. also considering the 1ksons cost the large part is kind of theoretical.

2. Are his kSons not distinguished in some way from unmarked / Marked / non-Tz Cult CSM?

not really . at least not for the points they cost . with cover everywhere and their ap 3 bolters being str 4 they arent much different from a 10 csm unit with 2 plasmas outside of 12"range . they do have a better kill ratio[but not much] at rapid fire range , but considering its also the charge range its not very ideal for them . forces them in to 3 units vs 1 tactic and that works only if your units are cheap.

3. Did the kSons lose anything that they would have been expected to have fielded in 2E, the 40k3 RB, or original 40k3 Codex?

well in 3.5 they had the thrall sorc build , their demon bomb [even if it wasnt widelly played , but then again nor were the 1ksons] , the turtle build . right now they have 1 army that mimics a normal csm army with better ap bolters [but same str] less hth power , more cost [3 1ksons units is 4 csm units]. now I know that saying that pure 1ksons lists have the same game play as DG or CSM spaming lists is nothing special in the dex we have , but unlike those two the 1ksons dont work .That is the important part . But considering how GW treated them in all dex its kind of a nothing new.

 

Ah in 2ed no sane person would play with 1ksons , each time a drain force was played d6 of them were removed from play. that kind of a sucked.

[Sovereign]

@jeske: thanks for your reply.

 

IMO "unplayable" probably overstates things quite a bit - not tournament-winning, but probably still playable casually.

 

Automatic Sv4+ & AP3 isn't distinct?

 

IMO, a single Codex isn't definitive, or we'd always be picking the "best of". Besides, as you note, kSons have always been the red-headed stepchildren of Chaos.

 

GW covers the basics for kSons every edition, sometimes stronger, othertimes weaker, usually weaker than the other Chaos options. But they're there, and they're an option. Never seen them win a tournament, ever, tho. So I don't think that's an important consideration among kSons players.

[the jeske]

still they had more builds. to make a different example . khorn or DG lists had a few builds . slogging[infiltration army for DG, runing behind rhinos for WE] , mecha , demon bombs [both mecha and biker builds for WE]. every army used more or less the same units , but each army had a distinct game play . Cult armies have it good anyway . DG or WE can at least make a fluffy list , that works . A WB/IW/AL/NL is identical in the new dex.

 

the +4sv gives nothing as it is easy to get cover +4 [even in hth as 1ksons are not very good at it] , the same cover makes ap3 bolters with only str 4 no so great[or not so great for the points they cost] . Make a chaos list with one HQ the normal support every chaos list has and 3 1ksons units and 4 csm units with plasma . Game play will be identical , only csm will be more flexible[more bodies extra scoring units, better in hth, easier counter to walkers and MC]. Hell even the same plasma build made with DG would work the same way. 1ksons would have made sense as the "magic" army for chaos . lots of spells , mulitple uses per turn , maybe even auto cast [like eldar lock powers] spells . the thrall build in 3.5 was a bit like that . it was not ideal , a tier 2 list at best[or rather people wished it was tier 2], But it was special and it was fun[for some people] to play with .

[satanaka]

@jeske: thanks for your reply.

 

IMO "unplayable" probably overstates things quite a bit - not tournament-winning, but probably still playable casually.

 

No "unplayable" IS the correct word for my army. Again, I have models from 3.5 I can not now use, due to the fact half my army was cultists, something that no longer exists in the current codex.