Gav Thorpe on Codex Chaos

[Grey Mage]

@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.

Unplayable isnt an overstatement- there are alot of people whose armies included elements in them that cannot be fielded any more.... whose entire armies were chopped down to about 20% of their previously usable models because of this.

 

If your a World Eaters player, I ask you... what are you to do? Lots and lots o beserkers? Boring, lacking tactical flexability of any nature, and having massive issues against enemy tanks.

 

Alpha Legion- As noted, cultists went out the window.... and infiltrate went with it. Now the alpha legion playstyle no longer exists in the codex- just marines with hydras on their shoulders who line up to get shot like everyone else.

 

Yes, if you take liberties with the fluff you can make good mono-god lists... but that doesnt make them a Legion anymore than 4rth ed space marines having counterattack made them space wolves.

 

You say detail for the sake of detail is bad design- I say its a sign of superior ability and a mark of taking a science into the realm of art. This isnt an engine design, its architecture.

[Castlerook]

.....The Hell?!?!?!

 

I thought this got deleted (or something) last month.........

 

Oh well. I've made my opinions clear enough throughout this topic, so I'll just say this;

Many people do have problems with the current codex, it seems to me that the majority of these people (like myself) are 3.5 codex users. For many people their army has been significantly reduced in size or effectiveness. Think about how many man hours went into converting or building units which are now illegal or completely useless. Think about how many people have quit the hobby because an army they enjoyed playing is now about as flexible as a steel I beam. This isn't throwing teddy out the pram, this is the realisation that a large investment of time, effort and money has been rendered obsolete because of a failed experiment. They have every right to be annoyed or furious. They have every right to demand a better codex. Expect a lot of vitriol from them if you say "Its ok, you can still play your army, just use count-as". For a lot of people they don't have the option, they don't recognise that option and nor should they.

 

The current codex is a Renegades codex, its not a Legion Codex. What is in the current codex could adequately represent the likes of the Red Corsairs or the Dark Wolves, after all they don't have a huge amount of equipment and many of them are recently turned Marine forces. But the problem is, to say that is represents a Chaos Legion is just begging to get a verbal kick to the teeth. The Legions have 10000 years to become unique compared to the new boys. Thats 10000 years of experience and skill, thats 10000 years of devising new weapons, new equipment, but does the codex truly show that? No, it doesn't. Its a slightly spikier version of the mini list that was found in the back of the 3rd Edition rulebook, its a sanitized list, instead of taking a step forward like the Ork codex or the Guard codex, it jumped several steps back.

 

.....Damn it!.....That was only supposed to be a couple of sentences!

[incinerator950]

@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.

 

So you don't consider Thousand Sons players or their chosen army and background to be incompatible with playing unimportant?

[Ragnar Lodbrok]

Unplayable isnt an overstatement- there are alot of people whose armies included elements in them that cannot be fielded any more.... whose entire armies were chopped down to about 20% of their previously usable models because of this.

 

If your a World Eaters player, I ask you... what are you to do? Lots and lots o beserkers? Boring, lacking tactical flexability of any nature, and having massive issues against enemy tanks.

 

Alpha Legion- As noted, cultists went out the window.... and infiltrate went with it. Now the alpha legion playstyle no longer exists in the codex- just marines with hydras on their shoulders who line up to get shot like everyone else.

 

Yes, if you take liberties with the fluff you can make good mono-god lists... but that doesnt make them a Legion anymore than 4rth ed space marines having counterattack made them space wolves.

 

You say detail for the sake of detail is bad design- I say its a sign of superior ability and a mark of taking a science into the realm of art. This isnt an engine design, its architecture.

 

Agreed, in fact this is the reason I have dumped my World Eater Warband it is tactically too limited to even be worth fielding at times. At this point I'm just trying to find a Chaos Undivided Legion that I like well enough to start playing again.

[Sovereign]

A few points:

- 10000 years outside the Eye isn't the same as inside the Eye, time flows differently

- World Eaters under 3.5 were a wind-up army with NO tactical finesse

 

I think 3.5 was an abomination of excess, and I've got every Chaos Codex ever printed. I happen to think the 3.0 version was great, and so is the current one.

 

And quite frankly, Legions are supposed to be limiting - that's the point of it being a sublist. If you want to play broad tactical armies, you play Black Legion or Ultras.

[satanaka]

A few points:

- 10000 years outside the Eye isn't the same as inside the Eye, time flows differently

- World Eaters under 3.5 were a wind-up army with NO tactical finesse

 

I think 3.5 was an abomination of excess, and I've got every Chaos Codex ever printed. I happen to think the 3.0 version was great, and so is the current one.

 

And quite frankly, Legions are supposed to be limiting - that's the point of it being a sublist. If you want to play broad tactical armies, you play Black Legion or Ultras.

 

Just wow.....

 

So in your eyes, 10K years of more experience at war, either in or out of the Eye, than the newer renegades means nothing?

 

Second, the WE aren't supposed to have any finesse. They're a bloodthirsty CC style legion. Not exactly much subtlety there to begin with.

 

As for the codices over the course of time, I've actually PLAYED those edition systems you mention and I can tell you what worked and what didn't. What editions gave me the most trouble concerning playing against Chaos was 2nd and 3.5. I could easily push Chaos around the table during the 3.0 debacle and I can easily do it now, with the one thing Chaos players hate to fight more than anything: Nids. I can bring almost as many shots a game per Devil-Fex as a whole squad of CSMs, and it only got worse when I field Devil - Tyrants, which I regularly do. And it only promises to get worse for Chaos with the new Nid book in January.

 

Also, I hate to tell you, but IW,WB, NL, and AL are all tactical armies, even more so than BL is.

[Sovereign]

Whatever, dude.

 

10k years on Terra might only be 10 years in the Eye, so I don't think it means much of anything.

 

3.5 WE aren't even playable. You simply wind them up and watched them go. The opponent might as well play solitiaire.

 

So? My Eldar destroyed 3.5 armies with ease. My point was simply that the oddity of a single Codex is meaningless.

 

I would agree - because they're all just BL armies with different paint schemes! :lol:

 

Edit: Watch with the launge there, may not be harmful in your part of the world, but can cause offence in other part. Insane Psychopath

[Grey Mage]

A few points:

- 10000 years outside the Eye isn't the same as inside the Eye, time flows differently

- World Eaters under 3.5 were a wind-up army with NO tactical finesse

 

I think 3.5 was an abomination of excess, and I've got every Chaos Codex ever printed. I happen to think the 3.0 version was great, and so is the current one.

 

And quite frankly, Legions are supposed to be limiting - that's the point of it being a sublist. If you want to play broad tactical armies, you play Black Legion or Ultras.

They were limiting- youve hit on the World Eaters issue of following enemy units around *one reason I never played them* as an example. Cult lists didnt just get bonuses, they also had restrictions.

 

They were good, and balanced. If people had problems with the wargear combinations and excesses' of chosen then those things should have been fixed without beating the rest of the book.

 

The current chaos codex is almost a joke- Ive seen players who were so mad about it that even now, couple years later, they cant talk about it without getting really, really worked up. Because it took something cool, something fun, and something that screamed flavor and screwed it harder than the DA.

 

And you cant find DA who dont complain, and few people tell them to stop for good reason.

[satanaka]

Whatever, dude.

 

10k years on Terra might only be 10 years in the Eye

 

And it could be the equivalent of 100K years also. ;)

[chillin]

3.5 WE aren't even playable. You simply wind them up and watched them go. The opponent might as well play solitiaire.

 

So? My Eldar destroyed 3.5 armies with ease.

 

In 3.5 I used mostly (if not all) undivided troops & cheap undivided lord, never lost to WE's army, even in tournies. So obviously I wasn't playing solitaire.

Not sure I understand you point here ?? was 3.5 C:csm over powered or did your eldar army beat them w/ ease? Which was it?

The reason you beat 3.5 chaos armies, back then eldar was way more broken then chaos, as far as absurdly powerful but insainly cheap armies go. Their ap 3 and ap 2 weops were so absurdly cheap, it was both laughable and annoying, WL's..what T.8 back then and barely over 100 pts ? Speaking of solitiare... him with his 12+ PW attacks and his bullet dodging harilies where the most ridiclous thing I can think of in 40k ever, followed closely by a T.8 WL that could pick out the PF champ/sarg. of a squad and squish him.

If there was ever a "abomination of excess" codex it was eldar back then.

.

If you think C:csm 3.0 was great, I would really like you do explain way ? It made NO sense. 1/2 the stuff in it was useless, the other 1/2 was over priced for what you got. Did you ever try to make a competitive (even semi-competitive) army out of it ?? The list of stuff that was useless/stupid is so vast that I woun't go into it here, why do you think it was followed in (relatitively) short order by 3.5 ??

But as bad as it was 3.0 was, it had a few good fluff blurbs about most of the legions, this dex eather ignored the fluff of the legions or murdered it.

Not saying you can't make strong armies out of this dex (well only 2 of them really) but no/wrong fluff + quite boring = lame dex.

I have no problem with legion rules being limiting, but jeeze, take a hour or two and write some up and put them in the codex ! <_<

 

Edit quote, Insane Psychopath

[the jeske]

I happen to think the 3.0 version was great, and so is the current one.

I must say you are the first person I ever that liked the JJ 3ed dex.the whole IA for chaos legions started , because the chaos players disliked the dex so much GW did decide to do something about it[mostlly because the JJ dex was selling really really bad].

lets take a quick look what chaos players got in Gav dex and what they lost.

 

DG DG

infiltration list / mecha

mecha list / LR rush

slogger list /

WE

slogger / mecha

demon bomb/ LR rush

biker build /

WB

demon bomb/ mecha

gunline / LR rush

slogger /

mecha/

AL

gunline/

infiltration list/ mecha[???]

cultists build / LR rush[???]

mecha/

NL

infiltration build / mecha[identical as the two above]

raptor build / LR rush[identical as the two above]

biker list/

mecha /

gunline /

EC

water build / water warrior

infiltration build/ mecha

syren build/

demon bomb/

1ksons/

thrall"magic army"build/ mecha

slogger / slogger

BL

gunline / mecha

slogger[including the BL khorn build]/ LR rush

mecha /

demon bomb/

IW

gunline / mecha

mecha / LR rush

semi infiltration build

 

 

and this is just tier 1 and 2 . there were a lot of for fun builds[biker armies that were not demon bomb for example] , like biker lists or combinations of two builds etc.

the new dex has LR rush and mecha. also for all the non cult /non BL lists the builds are identical.

[Legatus]

Infiltration for everyone is gone obviously, and daemons have been outsourced, but can still be combined legally with Chaos Space Marines when one plays larger games with multiple detachments or apocalypse. With those two gone for understandable reasons, wouldn't the other variants still work? I am particularly amazed by assertions I have read a few times that bikes and raptors are no use anymore, seeing as Raptors are now much more cost efficient and bikes being pretty much identical.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Infiltration for everyone is gone obviously, and daemons have been outsourced, but can still be combined legally with Chaos Space Marines when one plays larger games with multiple detachments or apocalypse.

 

Ahh, the old "its still legal in Apocalypse!" argument. Funnily enough, I don't want to have to play Apocalypse for what should be a legal part of my list anyway, so Apocalypse doesn't cut it. Also, having Tyranids in my army is legal in Apocalypse, so it doesn't make it any better.

I'd like to see that argument told to some Inquisition players, that they're getting Imperial Guard squads and Marine squads removed from their codex altogether, but don't worry! You can still use them in Apocalypse!

[Legatus]

But certainly you can understand that daemons got outsourced and will most likely not come back? So there is little sense in bemoaning their loss. Just as you can probably understand why infiltration for everyone got cut. Those are not issues to blame the current Codex for, they were decisions that would have been made regardless of the Codex or it's Author.

 

Personally I have enought Khorne Daemons for a legal small Chaos Daemons army if I ever wanted to try it (if only the Juggernauts were not as friggin expensive). I am not that bothered that World Eaters will now have to rely on Marines. I did not particularly liked how they were represented in the last Codex (not that this one is perfect for them), and I allways felt a bit cheap when I used Bloodletters or a Bloodthirster.

[Spacefrisian]

But the deamon codex is nothing more than a joke. So if i was in charge of GW that dex would be ditched and the units in it would be integrated in a brand new Chaos dex (along with traitor guard)

[satanaka]

But certainly you can understand that daemons got outsourced and will most likely not come back? So there is little sense in bemoaning their loss. Just as you can probably understand why infiltration for everyone got cut. Those are not issues to blame the current Codex for, they were decisions that would have been made regardless of the Codex or it's Author.

 

Personally I have enought Khorne Daemons for a legal small Chaos Daemons army if I ever wanted to try it (if only the Juggernauts were not as friggin expensive). I am not that bothered that World Eaters will now have to rely on Marines. I did not particularly liked how they were represented in the last Codex (not that this one is perfect for them), and I allways felt a bit cheap when I used Bloodletters or a Bloodthirster.

 

How do you know they would have been made anyway? Let's consider for a second how long daemons had been in the Chaos codex.

 

Umm, let's see, since earlier than '96, meaning almost 20 years? So why remove them now? Why not before now?

 

It was a stupid move and I'll predict we'll eventually get them back.

[Legatus]

How do you know they would have been made anyway? Let's consider for a second how long daemons had been in the Chaos codex.

I am quite certain that the drive came from the intention to make daemons into a stand alone Codex and that it was not a decision made by Gav to deny Chaos Space Marine lists the option for cult daemons. It is not an issue that was raisen because of this particular Codex Chaos Space Marines. It was merely coincidental that the decision to split daemons off of Chaos Marines (and WHFB Chaos Warriors) was made at that time. So even if the Codex would have been made completely focused on pure Legion lists with lots of variations, they would most likely still be without daemons.

 

 

It's a fraction of the previous one's vanilla list. That makes it less.

If you come to terms with the fact that marks given to CSM squads are now not permanent then the current Codex axtually does give you more unit options. Nurgle Bikes and Khorne Havocs were not possible in the previous Codex (neither were Khorne Raptors). You can still get Khorne Bikes and Khorne Terminators, though the lack of fearlessnes and the possibility that they can lose the marks makes them less attractive. It would be infair though to say the units are not there. They are just less fancy.

[the jeske]

seeing as Raptors are now much more cost efficient and bikes being pretty much identical.

not scoring [they were scoring in 4th ed] , not better in hth the ultra grit csm/zerkers/pms. runing raptors forces to run a 2 lord build to baby sit each raptor unit[that is already a big investment in to non scoring/not optimal units] and lords are not the best HQs in the gav dex. The raptors are not a cost efficient unit in 5th ed.

Infiltration for everyone is gone obviously, and daemons have been outsourced, but can still be combined legally with Chaos Space Marines when one plays larger games with multiple detachments or apocalypse. With those two gone for understandable reasons, wouldn't the other variants still work?

ok legatus , but apo is not widelly played and not all people who played demon bomb lists switched to demon dex . not only because they liked the csm part like the WB builds , but also because the demon dex is just like the chaos dex. It forces a mulit god build , with mono lists being weaker and/or non viable[specially slanesh ]. the game play is also different .

As stuff being gone . Well no one says its not .Thing is the lack of options like a infiltration list or demon bomb or even gunline , means that all non cult lists look the same . I did not show it properlly , but a DG infiltration list was different from an AL build using the same trait base for the list . the AL list had the suicide Lt/lord with speed , but were more shoty with auto canon havocks or 5 man minimax in support , while the DG list was more a short range/assault list. same trait different game play . Right now when I say mecha for DG and mecha for AL or NL , the game play is 100% identical .

 

Just as you can probably understand why infiltration for everyone got cut.

khan gives the whole army outflank and your not going to tell me that the sm dex is not a new dex desinged with 5th ed in mind.

Umm, let's see, since earlier than '96, meaning almost 20 years? So why remove them now? Why not before now?

I have an anwser to that.GW thought that A a WFB demon dex is not going to drive sales of demon models well enough . the 3.5ed dex had more then a few "demon bomb" builds and they though people who played those list would switch to codex demons.

Heh, seems like you got spanked by Eldar and are still butthurt. Anyhow, WL with gun is at least 120 pts.

I think the man was talking about 3ed times . When star canons were hvy 3 , WL could [and anything else] targeted stuff in btb , there were no killzones . At the same time we had the 3ed dex [the JJ one , the one that after an outcry from the fans forced the IA articles in WD] . If you want to tell me that in deep 3ed eldar were not an abomination , they didnt play much in 3ed with the 3ed chaos dex.

It was rules and fluff-consistent with the RB and 2E lists before them.

now that is odd . I wonder why the outcry from fans then ? and why is the 3ed JJ dex seen as generally seen as the worse of all chaos dex and why did it get the IA articles upgrades so soon after the codex hiting the shops?

To be honest, I could care less what anybody lost. Every single one of my armies has been undone by Codex changes at one point or another, so going into a butthurt whine doesn't impress me. That is, it completely fails the "so what?" test. Either you play something simple and are immune to changes, or you push the edge and get burnt with each reshuffle.

 

The other commentary is interesting. FWIW, I've always preferred Jervis over Gav.

ok you wont get me with who is the worse desinger JJ or Thorpe . I want fall for that trap.

 

As the caring part goes. The changing of dex or the changing of armies is not a problem. Everyone who plays more then one edition knows that new dex , means total revamp of armies . either all hvy/special weapon get changed or squad size or differrent HQs or we go back to footslogging or mecha etc. Change is not bad . When its actually change . 9 chaos 3.5 lists =>Gav dex=>9 new chaos lists [dont care about how playable they are. specially considering 1ksons] = all fans happy . sure some would whine that this or that is gone or that they uber unit X or Y is gone . But generally people would say ok . new lists to learn to play with , new meta game. But when 9 chaos lists change in to 2 builds that are identical , no matter if you play DG/AL/WB/NL/etc sucks hard. Specially as after that codex sm comes and codex SW comes and both have more builds [representing one faction] then chaos dex has for freaking 9. Its as if all loyalist got one dex[including BT/DA/BA/SW] and the whole difference between builds was if your tacticals have 10 man and bolters +hvy weapon or 10 man and pistol+ccw.

But really, this is no different than IG losing free Deep Strike / Light Infantry / etc.

no its not. IG got options to modifiy their lists[save for ogryns more or less everything is playable] , they got new stuff [like a whole new cavalery build]. Now if IG got one gunline list with always the same units , then yes it would be the same then . only its not . IG can run psyker squad , but can as well not. They can run vets , but they can as well not run them . Are rough riders a viable counter unit and can they run them ? yes , but they dont have to . Can they use valkirias without a valk build ? yes they can , but they can as well run a list without them. IG losing elysian drop troops when they get the air cavalery build is not the same as chaos losing 9 different list with offten more then 1 build and getting two builds instead.

Nurgle Bikes and Khorne Havocs were not possible in the previous Codex (neither were Khorne Raptors).

ehh that is not true . DG bikers [who are also not fluffy so it does make sense] or WE havocks were not possible . Bikers with mark of khorn/slanesh/nurgle and havocks with any chaos mark were possible , if one made a non legion[or BL] list . There is really not much the new dex gives that wasnt possible in the old dex. the only big thing was oblits in IW builds , but then again H-man was a IW fanatic and he limited himself in the number of IW special rules anyway[what doesnt mean they didnt have the most special rules of all legions of course ]

[Lay]

It's a fraction of the previous one's vanilla list. That makes it less.

If you come to terms with the fact that marks given to CSM squads are now not permanent then the current Codex axtually does give you more unit options. Nurgle Bikes and Khorne Havocs were not possible in the previous Codex (neither were Khorne Raptors). You can still get Khorne Bikes and Khorne Terminators, though the lack of fearlessnes and the possibility that they can lose the marks makes them less attractive. It would be infair though to say the units are not there. They are just less fancy.

I've come to terms with the fact that marks are '+1 something' upgrades that are nowhere near the level of customisation that was possible under the old Codex, only a fraction of that level. Also, regardless of the reason, the range of Daemons has been reduced to two entries.

[Legatus]

khan gives the whole army outflank and your not going to tell me that the sm dex is not a new dex desinged with 5th ed in mind.

No, but I am going to tell you that in my opinion special characters are for special games and you don't need Shrike to play Raven Guard, but a lot of players will get the impression that you need Shrike if you want to play them or will take a Special Character in every game and base their whole army around them simply because the Codex puts so much emphasis on the flashy Chapter tactics and does not restrict their use.

 

ehh that is not true . DG bikers [who are also not fluffy so it does make sense] or WE havocks were not possible . Bikers with mark of khorn/slanesh/nurgle and havocks with any chaos mark were possible , if one made a non legion[or BL] list .

You might want to double check the "who can get what mark" table on page 38 of the 3.5 Codex.

 

---

 

I've come to terms with the fact that marks are '+1 something' upgrades that are nowhere near the level of customisation that was possible under the old Codex, only a fraction of that level.

That was very situational in the previous Codex. Give Mark of Khorne to a squad of CSM and they basically lose all of their options except for plasma pistols. Give th eMark of Khorne to a squad of Bikes and they lose the special weapon options. The one unit that was still imensely customizeable when given a Mark were the chosen, which indeed were a very interresting unit to toy around with, but I would prever distinct "terminator" and "Veteran" choices, even if perhaps the current incarnations are not the best.

 

Also, regardless of the reason, the range of Daemons has been reduced to two entries.

Yes, but as I have been trying to argue that it is because of understandable reasons, and not because of reasons based on how the current Chaos Codex was supposed to work, but for external reasons. Even in a Codex with 9 distinct Legion lists, the daemons would most likely have been gone. If the current Codex would not have included cult daemons no matter how he would have turned out, it is a moot point to list that as a reason for why this Codex is not well received.

[Lay]

Even in a Codex with 9 distinct Legion lists, the daemons would most likely have been gone.

These lists would have made a difference, but no, in the end both were removed. And what's left in the Codex contains options that are arguably 'less fancy' than before. Not really a gain.

 

it is a moot point to list that as a reason for why this Codex is not well received.

Not quite my point. I listed Daemons to show how the range of options was reduced.

[HERO]

So, I broke out the old CSM codex (the one before this latest one).. I'm guessing that's what you guys call 3.5?

 

I looked over the lord choices really quick and I was so shocked to see how many different options they had.

 

100 points of Daemonic Gifts. 150 total from the Wargear section.

 

I made a Chaos Lord with Mark of Khorne.

He had 2+/5++, T4(5) with FNP, Collar of Khorne

5 attacks + D3 on the charge

S6 Power Weapon + Furious Charge Veteran skill

Frag + Pistol

 

For 187 points (the police code for Homicide hah)

 

Such customization.. it blew me away. I've had this book for such a long time but since I played DH back in the day, I had no idea what I was missing out on.

 

I can see why so many people are enraged by this "new" codex. It's a huge step in the wrong direction I think.

[Castlerook]

why is the 3ed JJ dex seen as generally seen as the worse of all chaos dex and why did it get the IA articles upgrades so soon after the codex hiting the shops?

Because the 3rd edition was extremely poorly thought out and very unfluffy, Khorne Sorcerer for example. It was essentially the Marine codex with spikes. The only new additions were the Raptors (which were at that stage just a spiky version of the Assault Marines, with the option for assault weapons), Obliterators (Not much difference between them and Terminators, only they had more guns) and Possessed (3 mandatory rolls on a table for abilities, and if you rolled the same result, tough, you can't reroll and you've wasted a roll).

The IA articles had nothing to do with the codex itself, after all there were 9 other Legions/Later Chapters which were covered by the articles besides the Chaos Legions. The IA articles were merely an attempt to bring more information to the gamer, after all there are whole books written about the Big 4 Loyalists/Chaos Legions, but next to nothing about the lesser known Legions like the Salamanders. The IA articles have become the cornerstone of how people see their armies. In fact the first Legion IA was in 2001, 2 years after the 3rd edition codex and a little over 18 months before the 3.5 codex.

 

As the caring part goes. The changing of dex or the changing of armies is not a problem.

It can be if it renders Characters/Units/Vehicles obsolete or illegal. Take the crossover from 2nd Edition to 3rd, and Assault Marines for example. In 2nd Edition Assault Marines had the option for many exotic weapons, from hand flamers to several types of power weapons. 3rd edition comes along and suddenly Wargear is some available to Characters or Unit Leaders. Which meant people had a couple of choices; take apart their lovingly painted units, buying new units to replace the current unit (remember this is a time when the majority of the minis were metal) or use Count As (Which could lead to cheating, especially if there were a lot of power weapons in the unit "No, you didn't kill my veteran sergeant, he's outside of combat. No I didn't say he was fighting the warlord in the previous turn!").

 

Eldar were great in 3E, especially as most ppl played MEQs. That's the fault of too many players playing MEQ and making an easy metagame.

And the vast majority of players don't play tournamnets, they play friendly games. Eldar were good because the people who were playing them were good players. Any army can be a top tier army, it depends on if someone knows how to do play it. Most units in 3rd were combat monsters due to the rulebook. Assault Marines could slice a large enemy unit in a single turn, termagants could chew an Meganob unit in a turn due to the sheer number of attacks. You can't compare 3rd edition to 5th edition, yes the absolute basics are the same, but the way units work and fight in means theres a huge disparity between units in 3rd and units in 5th. Eldar might be one of the top tournament races, but they are being usurped by other armies which you'd never see before now, Imperial Guard are the tournament army, just ask any of the forum members who regularly play in tournaments.

 

Jervis designs for designers. Gav designs for kiddies. If you like lots of chrome, as most GW players like, you will like Gav. If you like clean mechanics and a minimalist approach, you like Jervis. Nothing wrong with either approach, it's like a choice between vanilla and rocky road. We saw the same thing when Jervis cleaned up Epic. And to be quite honest, I was actually happiest playing with the 3E Rulebook lists...

Are. You. Kidding. Me?!?!

Jervis is not God, in fact many people would say Jervis has lost the plot concerning when writing codecii. Jervis might have gone with the minimalist approach, but lets take a look at the last major codex he wrote, the Dark Angels codex. There are whole threads which cannot even begin to convey how badly the codex has faired since it was written. Most people expect a codex to be effective for at least 5 years, thanks to the minimalist approach, the effective lifecycle of that particular codex was less then 18 months.

Oh, and by the way, that Eldar codex you love so much, hmmmmm, I wonder who wrote it, oh yes, Mr. Chrome himself...Sorry, I mean Gavin Thorpe.

Both authors had their own respective styles (I say had, becuase we know Gav has left the Studio), but both authors really did drop the ball with the shortlived minimalist approach.

Pete Haines had a great idea with 3.5, it was a nice fluffy list. It was far more detailed then other lists at the time. Sure there were a lot of bonuses, but there were a lot of drawbacks as well, Death Guard for example. If you used the suggestions in the Nurgle Section, you had an army that could not only dish out the damage but could also take the hits as well. Was it going to set any speed records? Nope, but a lot of people thought it was a fair tradeoff. The 3.5 codex was like a sharp blade, it could be very effective used correctly, but if you tried to tip things too much in your favour, you'd end up cutting yourself deeply. In my opinion, it was very hard to abuse the 3.5 list, because the sheer variety offered by the list meant people didn't have to resort to what is effectively cheating.

 

It never ceases to amaze me how somebody "losing" an army happens - what usually really happens is that somebody resists making a change. I do this too. But if people want to go down the road of who suffers more, I guess I can play that game. Tho it's really a lot of negative energy and I get tired of the whole thing.

Because people put their time and money into their army, the army they wanted. So what are they supposed to do when the majority of the list is now considered useless. Throw good money after bad? Or retire the army and try something new, hoping that eventually the designers will see sense and create a worthwhile codex again. That example I mentioned earlier, about the 2nd Edition Assault Marines. The real reason Vanguard were brought in was because GW knew many people wanted to bring those old units back, the units with unique options, so you could have a unit with several power weapons. To balance it, overly priced unit, as it should be!

 

Sure, IG got Cav, which costs more dollars and points, and is more limited and vulnerable than Drop Troops. Or sure, IG got Psykers, which are just another light Ordnance. Camo got pulled back big time (IG lost 2+ GtG saves!) Overall, IG gained nothing, and aguably lost quite a bit. So really, they can cry as much as CSM if they want to.

IG, pre-Doctrines, were considered to be the weakest army in the game. Doctrines-Era they were consider the most broken. The thing is 5th edition Guard is now the most balanced list in the game. Its now also one of the most cost effective armies (a small army can actually be small, instead of a minimum of 40 Guardsmen you can now have an army made up of 21 Guardsmen). Earlier in this thread I posted the different armies the Guard can now field. What the Guard have lost is nothing compared to what they gained. Many units/rules which were dropped in 3rd have been brought back, Primaris Psyker, Penal Legions, an Orders system are all examples. Even people who love Forge World can field their favourite tanks. Give Veterans Camo Cloaks and into hard cover and you have a unit that has a 2+ cover save. And they can be TROOPS.....Veterans are my favourite unit in the game, so thats a huge bonus.

 

If your going to cause an arguement, at least try to do a little research before you throw the match. As it is, a lot of your arguements are contradicitonary and are completely unfounded. I consider myself a fair person, I'll let a person give their opinion and I'll respect it if its a good point and has a great deal of thought put into it. What I can't abide is someone who wants to rile people and insult for its own sake.

[Sovereign]

If your going to cause an arguement, at least try to do a little research before you throw the match. As it is, a lot of your arguements are contradicitonary and are completely unfounded.

Dude, given that I've played Eldar since 2nd, with full armies of SM/CSM/IG since 3rd, I think I've lived and played enough, thanks.

 

The contradictions are because you've got two people's replies mixed up - the first two quotes aren't even by me! If you're going to put my name down, at least make sure I wrote it!

 

The rest is pretty much all differing opinion, and I'm good with that. A minority opinion is still an opinion, and popularity doesn't equal correctness. Especially when talking about the pure subjectiveness tied to preferences in game rules for little toy soldiers.

 

Finally, are you defending 3.5 Iron Warriors as not abusive at the time?

[Grey Mage]

Infiltration for everyone is gone obviously, and daemons have been outsourced, but can still be combined legally with Chaos Space Marines when one plays larger games with multiple detachments or apocalypse. With those two gone for understandable reasons, wouldn't the other variants still work? I am particularly amazed by assertions I have read a few times that bikes and raptors are no use anymore, seeing as Raptors are now much more cost efficient and bikes being pretty much identical.

What understandable reasons are those legatus?