Dissapointments with the new codex.

[Attomsk]

Any ordonnance is the pinacle of sniping.

 

When it lands a "hit", wounds are assigned from the center of the blast. And what happens when the center is a HQ ? They'll have to succeed high number of LoS rolls. What's the same when you target a Comissar, a Icon bearer, and anything that "hides in a squad". Ordonnance is a lot stronger than it was.

 

 

You are mistaken, that is for barrage weapons, not Ordnance. Ordnance causes other shots on the vehicle to be snapshots and gets 2D6 pick the highest for armor penetration. It still acts as if it was being fired from the direction of the vehicle like any other weapon.

[Brother Turok]

Hmm,

 

First off the 3.5 dex was way overpowered and ridiculous.... there I said it. It was not balanced and I knew people who would make an uber character and wipe the board. People loved it because it was fluffy but very, very cheesy.

 

Second, I switched to chaos after the Dark Angels after they nuetered the DA... I'll call it the 4th edition fiasco. I thought the last chaos dex was ok, not fluffy, but I could take regular marines and manipulate characteristics with chaos marks etc. I actually did well with this codex and it was fairly well balanced. Better than other armies out there at the time.

 

Third, I love this codex. It is more fluffy. They also pulled 'accounting' moves, making certain things better and other things worse. Life is all about balance. Yea the demon engines have low armor, etc, but the codex makes up for this in other areas. Look at bezerkers now! +2 attacks if you charge or counterattack with +2 if you get charged. Khorn was all about smacking your opponent in the face, which they do well now. Look at Huron now - he isn't totally worthless anymore!

 

A new codex means we all have to learn the new tricks as some old tactics won't work the same, but I welcome this change. Then again I got the ultimate punch to the gonads with 4th ed DA after playing DA for many years, and I don't think GW could ever match that amount of dissapointment and depression again.

 

I say glass is half-full, just my 2 cents

[Azekai]

I think you posted in the wrong thread there, Turok.

 

I know others have said this, but I will say it again- I really miss our old icons. 5 point teleport homers? Now we don't have anything to help with deepstriking (dimensional key doesn't count).

[Boshea]

Third, I love this codex. It is more fluffy. They also pulled 'accounting' moves, making certain things better and other things worse. Life is all about balance. Yea the demon engines have low armor, etc, but the codex makes up for this in other areas. Look at bezerkers now! +2 attacks if you charge or counterattack with +2 if you get charged. Khorn was all about smacking your opponent in the face, which they do well now.

Counter-Attack only gives +1A, which means Rage+Counter Attack is exactly like the old +1A. Just now you lose way more attacks when doing a disorganized charge, charging into defensive grenades, fail your LD on counter-attack, or are in prolonged combat.

[Minsc]

Life is all about balance. Yea the demon engines have low armor, etc, but the codex makes up for this in other areas. Look at bezerkers now! +2 attacks if you charge or counterattack with +2 if you get charged. Khorn was all about smacking your opponent in the face, which they do well now

 

A Berzerker had 4 attacks on the charge in the last dex, and it's the same now. What's your point?

Mark of Khorne is much worse now than it was in the last codex. (and so is Mark of Tzeentch, ironically.), as demonstrated by Boshea above.

 

I agree that the new codex is a vast improvement over the last one, but that's not really something to be impressed by, and the new codex have many issues as well. (Like Tzeentch being more or less unplayable, compared to the other 3 marks.)

[the jeske]

Better than other armies out there at the time.

better then circus, nidzilla and trait marines in 4th ed ?

 

 

 

First off the 3.5 dex was way overpowered and ridiculous.... there I said it. It was not balanced and I knew people who would make an uber character and wipe the board. People loved it because it was fluffy but very, very cheesy

againt what fluff sm lists[aka 10 man tacticals , cpts as leaders etc] ? 3.5 was perfectly balanced because it A played against itself [over 20 different builds and when I say different I mean like two armies different , not I'll use 3 pms instead of 3 csm different] , B it played against eldar circus . C it played against nidzylla D it played against SM minimax gunlines supported by AC spam .

Counter-Attack only gives +1A, which means Rage+Counter Attack is exactly like the old +1A. Just now you lose way more attacks when doing a disorganized charge, charging into defensive grenades, fail your LD on counter-attack, or are in prolonged combat.

this + taking khorn csm instead of zerkers makes your army perform better.

 

Jeske, you really think the defiler is worse than the forgefiend? It has far better range - providing the chaos army something that they can't get elsewhere, an additional hull point - which matters a lot on a Daemon walker with IWND, better melee abilities if it comes to that, and roughly comparable firepower to a fiend without plasmaface, while costing about the same as a fiend with plasmaface. I'd much rather spend those 20 odd points on an extra hull point rather than an extra ectocannon, and it seems to me that that's basically what the defiler is.

the fiend is better because its cheaper . I look at it this way under 2k neither should be used . If it is then you have to take 2 and defiler cost realy starts to sting. You also end up with less flyer support , although at least in theory 2 fiends are better against flyers then 2 defilers [should be 1 out of 2 , because one will totaly get creamed as soon as flyers enter the board] .

so if we are to use them , then we are looking at double FoC so 2k and more . Now at 1500 we could have hidden an av12 or two , for some time . At 2k or over we dont . at 2k every good army that can , has flyers , there is more firepower around . If we get turn 1 we get a ok turn of shoting , if we dont there is a good chance they will die . I mean SW at 2k stop runing 5xRL and switch to 6xRL 9xlas. that is enough of a problem to run av 12 stuff.

 

 

 

4) The shifting from mech to foot sloggers means that blast weapons have more exposed targets to hit.

against tied orcs or nids maybe . but against meq ? with an bs 3 the scater goes off the unit most of the time , unless someone walks his marines base to base.

[Smurfalypse]

QUOTE

First off the 3.5 dex was way overpowered and ridiculous.... there I said it. It was not balanced and I knew people who would make an uber character and wipe the board. People loved it because it was fluffy but very, very cheesy

againt what fluff sm lists[aka 10 man tacticals , cpts as leaders etc] ? 3.5 was perfectly balanced because it A played against itself [over 20 different builds and when I say different I mean like two armies different , not I'll use 3 pms instead of 3 csm different] , B it played against eldar circus . C it played against nidzylla D it played against SM minimax gunlines supported by AC spam

 

You usually make good points man, but this is just a terrible statement.

You are literally saying that it was a balanced codex because more people played it and so it played itself most of the time. . .

More people played it because it was so unbalanced that you almost had to play it to have a chance in tourney, very little could stand against it.

For fun people struggled against it because of its pure power. This is probably the single worst codex ever written, the ONLY reason it gets a pass is because of how much people won with it. I would build really crappy and goofey lists to play against my friends and still I would just "outclass" them.

 

It did have one thing going for it and that was the sheer amount of customization involved. That was what should be taken from that codex and used, but that same customization made it impossible to balance correctly. Hence when I went to games day Baltimore a few years in a row, out of the few hundred people in the tourney over half were CSM players. Because well, to stand a chance, that is what you had to play.

 

All the codexs should be balanced to the OTHER codexs, not itself. If one codex rules all the others, than you will see a massive influx of people ONLY playing that specific codex.

 

This argument has been had many many times on these forums but the sole reason that we ended up with 4th ed being the way it was is because of the 3.5 Chaos Codex. It literally destroyed the format and they attempted to rein it all in, unfortunately GW went to far and made a series of books that were terrible (CSM, DA, Eldar as the primary ones).

[Goreshed]

Jeske you and I have to simply agree to disagree. Both of us have our own view points. Neither of us will be swayed by the other. I'm ok with that :angry:

 

However this is starting like the last edition started when Chaos was first out of the gate. Our last dex was the first and GW hemmed and hawd over this was the new track that the edition was taking. Most chaos players were alright with this as if everyone had to share the same then everyone would be on the same level. Then of course GW changed how they were going to do things and left us in the dust. Until GW comes out with the other books we wont know how they will stack up. We are only going off of what we knew previously.

 

Yes we can groan and moan over our latest dex verse the others but we don't know how they will butcher or dex lurch the others till they come out. New edition, new styles, lets hit the refresh button.

[Circus Nurgling]

I know others have said this, but I will say it again- I really miss our old icons. 5 point teleport homers? Now we don't have anything to help with deepstriking (dimensional key doesn't count).

 

This, again and again, is probably my biggest gripe. Dimensional key won't even let you have a homer for daemons, for crying out loud!!!

 

I play on terrain heavy boards. There's no safe place for me to stick a daemon ally, first turn, and not have the possibility of a mishap. Last game I played I had 3 mishaps, 2 went bad (the other player got to place them).

[CitadelArmyGuy]

Hmm I actually came to the opposite conclusion, that battlecannons are pretty awesome in 6th.

1) We no longer have to worry about the stupid 1/2 S shots anymore, so we're always S8.

2) Cover is less powerful now, so we can expect more wounds.

3) 72" range is huge, this isn't so much a change as just a bonus.

4) The shifting from mech to foot sloggers means that blast weapons have more exposed targets to hit.

 

As far as the other weapons, I'm liking the default loadout now. Reaper gives you something to threaten flyers with, since the cannon is useful there and heavy flamer on overwatch duty isn't too shabby at all.

Valid reasoning. Also, since Blasts are always full strength versus vehicles (center-hole rule is gone) combined with Ordinance AV penetration rules means a Battlecannon is more than adequate to hit vehicles (althought generally there'll be Infantry that need shooting instead).

 

The deal-breaker for me about the Defiler is that if he shoots his Battlecannon, all other weapons are Snap-shots, even if he doesn't move (BRB Page 71, final paragraph).

[Raven Angel]

I Supose the big thing is that to me the book feels unfinished. Like they had ideas but didn't finish putting them in so obvious units like drop pods get left out again.

[minigun762]

The deal-breaker for me about the Defiler is that if he shoots his Battlecannon, all other weapons are Snap-shots, even if he doesn't move (BRB Page 71, final paragraph).

 

I hear you, that is a hassle. Previously I was a fan of the full DCCW (now power fist) loadout for Defilers but with replacement of one power fist option with the more expensive scourge, I don't think its worth it anymore.

 

I can partially justify the weapons by looking at the reaper as an emergency AA weapon where I couldn't be firing the battle cannon anyway due to it being blast. The flamer, I think of it mostly for overwatch and unless I misread it, you can still overwatch after firing the battlecannon.

[Minsc]

Add the following in the wargear section:

Infernobolts, 5 pts. (MoT only.)

Sonic Blaster, 5 pts (MoS only.)

(Now all 4 godspecific legion would have something cheap that suits their legion, Blight Grenades and overpriced chainaxes being the other two.)

 

Change the warpstrike-rule for Warp Talon to "During an assault, Warptalons count as equiped with assault grenades. Any unit that overwatches against Warptalons must take a Blindtest. If they fail they may not overwatch, and are blinded as per the blind-rule).

 

Give our named HQ's a freaking Sigil of Corruption. Out of our 6 SC's with a IV, only 1 (Huron) got the PM about 4++ saves.

 

Allow Helbrute's to take vehicle-upgrades for the pointcosts listed.

 

Give Mutilators +1 attack or +1 WS. They're supposed to be so dedicated to combat that they've turned into living weapons, yet they have the same WS and A as your average champion/terminator?

 

(Make a complete rework on Thousand Sons and the MoTz/IoTz in general.)

 

- - - -

 

Afew small changes (apart from the MoTz-ones), and I'd pe perfectly happy with the new codex.

 

I really like our new codex, but it feels unfinished and rushed. Phil Kelly can write better than this, so why didn't he?

I'm not to bothered about some units in the codex being somewhat overpriced (Defiler, Forgefiend, Warptalon, Possessed, I'm looking at you!), because there are some thing that are underpriced (Sorcerer levels, Raptors, Bikes, non flakk-Havoc's, Bikes for IC's, I'm looking at you!), so it evens out in the end. What bothers me is the feeling of "Meh" that oozes from the codex. It could've been so much funnier and better without altering it's balanced powerlevel, but GW/PK just couldn't be bothered.

[Killax]

I really like our new codex, but it feels unfinished and rushed. Phil Kelly can write better than this, so why didn't he?

I'm not to bothered about some units in the codex being somewhat overpriced (Defiler, Forgefiend, Warptalon, Possessed, I'm looking at you!), because there are some thing that are underpriced (Sorcerer levels, Raptors, Bikes, non flakk-Havoc's, Bikes for IC's, I'm looking at you!), so it evens out in the end. What bothers me is the feeling of "Meh" that oozes from the codex. It could've been so much funnier and better without altering it's balanced powerlevel, but GW/PK just couldn't be bothered.

 

I have the same feeling, the codex feels finished about 85%, the last percentages needed in the upgrades of units (weapons etc.) and the lack of a drop pod/dreadclaw and good overall thinking.

 

The new faq covers the first things of something that should not have been there, a point cost redux in the Hellbrute, the zombie cultists with no upgrade options etc.

It would have been really easy to double check that kind of stuff since it was noticed by the gamers within a day.

 

I don't agree in on the part you've said about the Mweh that oozes out of it, most units are good enough the only problem is that Matt Ward has made some bull:cuss that every other army has to suffer now.

[the jeske]

Phil Kelly can write better than this, so why didn't he?

it wasnt eldar.

 

Also, since Blasts are always full strength versus vehicles (center-hole rule is gone) combined with Ordinance AV penetration rules means a Battlecannon is more than adequate to hit vehicles (althought generally there'll be Infantry that need shooting instead).

thats like saying a single RL is enough anti tank .

[minigun762]

Also, since Blasts are always full strength versus vehicles (center-hole rule is gone) combined with Ordinance AV penetration rules means a Battlecannon is more than adequate to hit vehicles (althought generally there'll be Infantry that need shooting instead).

thats like saying a single RL is enough anti tank .

 

I wouldn't say that. Cannons are less likely to miss entirely and the reroll to pen the target makes it more reliable are hurting armor than a single missile. Battlecannons are probably the #1 jack of all trades weapon out there, so I'm not expecting them to beat specialist weapons but I am expecting it to be a threat to most anything on the battlefield (flyer's don't count because they're above the battlefield, not on it :ph34r: )

[Minsc]

it wasnt eldar.

 

To be fair, Orks where also a very good (and well written) codex when they were released.

Space Wolves are still powerful, despite starting to grow old.

 

This is probably why this bothers me so much - Phil Kelly is (was?) my favourite writer, both in 40k and wfb.

His codeci/armybooks are usually quite balanced while still being fun and competetive, and well written with good and hilarious fluff. Essentially you can feel that he know what he's doing.

I feel nothing of this with the CSM-codex, in fact this feels like something Cruddace would've written.

 

Guess I should've seen this comming. This isn't Phil Kellys first major bo-bo (Beastmen in WFB).

I guess his glorydays are behind him now. :ph34r:

[techsoldaten]

First off the 3.5 dex was way overpowered and ridiculous.... there I said it. It was not balanced and I knew people who would make an uber character and wipe the board. People loved it because it was fluffy but very, very cheesy

againt what fluff sm lists[aka 10 man tacticals , cpts as leaders etc] ? 3.5 was perfectly balanced because it A played against itself [over 20 different builds and when I say different I mean like two armies different , not I'll use 3 pms instead of 3 csm different] , B it played against eldar circus . C it played against nidzylla D it played against SM minimax gunlines supported by AC spam .

I agree with this point 100% and have often had similar thoughts about the 3.5 Codex. For me, it really gets to the issue of how much we take things like 'balance' for granted.

 

On the one hand, I really don't believe it's possible to achieve 'balance' across a series of Codexes, at least not in the way most people mean it. Achieving army lists where there are effective, affordable counters to most possible unit combinations in other armies is hard, probably at the level of classical math problems. When you consider there are different authors, playtesters, marketing / business concerns and other factors that come into the situation, it's probably not an issue that can be solved with the resources that are available to GW.

 

It seems to be the appropriate response to the situation is creating systems where lots of OP lists are possible instead of siloing people into creating armies that are centered around several sets of common choices for the sake of balance. The 3.5 Codex did exactly that, and people seem to have short memories when they take issue with how OP it was. I remember a lot of players complaining about how bad certain Nid, SM and Eldar lists were at the time. If anything, the CSM Codex was so 'OP' because it opened up such a variety of options - you couldn't really prepare to fight all the different variations that were possible.

 

On the other hand, there's power creep going on in the Codexes these days, we really saw it with Gray Knights and I believe we will see it again with Codexes subsequent to the CSM Codex. Creating a Codex that is future proof and will remain competitive for the time that it will be the de-facto list for a certain army is probably not possible anymore, there are too many incentives for GW to sell new models by releasing really tough new Codexes. I know a lot of people who started Gray Knight armies just to play competitively, and have heard a lot of reports of the same from other players.

 

Again, creating Codexes that are 'imbalanced' from the start would be a practical solution to this issue. Just build them as tough as possible and let people go at it with everything they have. Account for power creep by giving everyone a ton of power right from the start.

 

I know these concerns would be impractical to respond to and go against a lot of what people look for in games. I also don't think GW is unaware of the issues being raised here and struggle to deal with them in their own way. If I had to be purely objective and make a decision on which Codex was better, 3.5 or 6, I would say 3.5 though. It simply provides so many more options for how to put together armies that are plain tough to deal with. In the 6th, there are certain things you can take for granted seeing in most armies (bikers being the top of that list); under 3.5, I saw a lot more combinations that took entirely different units each time.

[Boshea]

this + taking khorn csm instead of zerkers makes your army perform better.

Hard to say it really feels that way. Even if you splurge to give them Bolter, Bolt pistol, and CCW they can at least get away traveling on foot or Rhinos since they'll still have a respectable shooting phase. Even just going Pistol+CCW you'll still have two guys rocking some form of special weapon to make up for the rest of the squads weak shooting. Its basically Points+Special Weapons versus Fearless+WS+Furious Charge, and Fearless is the only thing I feel Berzerkers have a clear advantage with. WS5 and Furious Charge are nice, but with the number of attacks you put out on a charge its usually just overkill.

 

Yes you can give them fearless with an icon, but I trust my icons living even less now with precision shots kicking around.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

Again, creating Codexes that are 'imbalanced' from the start would be a practical solution to this issue. Just build them as tough as possible and let people go at it with everything they have. Account for power creep by giving everyone a ton of power right from the start.

 

 

This, sir, is a horrible idea. War Machine went that way after Apotheosis and Hordes followed suit, and that is what forced me out of those games. Every army becomes a one-trick pony, and unless your army has the appropriate counter-trick, you're hosed and have about a 1% chance to pull off a win. That kind of thinking is what makes folks rage-quit games.

[Iron Sage]

Agree.

 

Berzerkers are still very usuable.

 

Fearless is a very strong trait. Chaos space marines cannot both have Icon of Vengeance and Icon of Wrath anyway, so Berserkers are therefore, as they should be, specialized.

 

 

Regarding 3.5, I started playing chaos back then, and I was a total noob, but ended up defeating many experienced players. It felt over powered to me back then. Everyone claimed it was (those not playing chaos) overpowered in the extreme, and my experiences fooling around with it, made me agree with them eventually.

People are just hopelessly romantic and wants an Über Codex. Human nature I guess.

[Sception]

Give our named HQ's a freaking Sigil of Corruption. Out of our 6 SC's with a IV, only 1 (Huron) got the PM about 4++ saves.

 

Though I share your complaints on special characters and other bits in general, I do believe that Abby and Ahriman have 4++ saves as well.

[Minsc]

Give our named HQ's a freaking Sigil of Corruption. Out of our 6 SC's with a IV, only 1 (Huron) got the PM about 4++ saves.

 

Though I share your complaints on special characters and other bits in general, I do believe that Abby and Ahriman have 4++ saves as well.

 

Yes, thanks to MoTz. They still have a 5++ save by default.

If this was a Mat-Dex, you can be sure that both Ahriman and Abaddon would be strutting around with a 3++ right now, and the rest of the char's would have at least a 4++.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

Give our named HQ's a freaking Sigil of Corruption. Out of our 6 SC's with a IV, only 1 (Huron) got the PM about 4++ saves.

 

Though I share your complaints on special characters and other bits in general, I do believe that Abby and Ahriman have 4++ saves as well.

 

Yes, thanks to MoTz. They still have a 5++ save by default.

If this was a Mat-Dex, you can be sure that both Ahriman and Abaddon would be strutting around with a 3++ right now, and the rest of the char's would have at least a 4++.

 

 

In Ward's defense (ugh...can't believe I just typed that), he didn't give Calgar or Dante a 3++, and he was at least smart enough not to give Mephiston an I-save at all.

[Kol Saresk]

In Ward's defense (ugh...can't believe I just typed that)

Agent Ferrum has been compromised. Must terminate subject.