The real problem with the Chaos Space Marines Codex

[Minsc]

And don't forget, every army needs to strike last to get AP2.

 

Every army?

[Hellios]

And don't forget, every army needs to strike last to get AP2.

 

I'll let the Dark Eldar players in my area know.

[Captain Idaho]

Don't be pedantic, you knew what I meant. Most armies based upon Imperial/human armies are stuck with unwieldy weapons for AP2.

[Nehekhare]

Sometimes a weakness has to be a defining feature of a Codex.

 

I guess that is the theme of it: bad guys loose in the end.

 

Challenges and icons are two things that make me think our troops are made to be picked apart and broken cinematically.

 

We have to issue challenges, so the enemy can decide whether to

a) sacrifice a throwaway char to our khorne combat monster and have his unit/independent char slaughter our regular guys, winning by combat resolution, or

b.) tank/kill our charakter with his combat char by means of better equipment, preventing the damage he may do to his guys and winning combat, or

c) let the sergeants chug it our and slaughter troops with any independent chars (option used if chaos challenges with sergeant), evening out the losses

of course, if any side hasn't got an independent char, they'd better brought the appropriate weapons to the fight. Either way, we have to play with open cards, they may play tactically. Either way, challenges work to the enemy's advantage only.

 

Second, the icons: easy to remove beforehand via barrage sniping or precision shots, and the icon bearer isn't a char, so no LO,S!

 

icons and lords are the only source of fearlessness in the dex, and unit champions almost always have +1Ld - or if you see it the other way around: give the unit -1Ld if killed.

 

so if one source of immunity to morale can be neutered via the challenge mechanic in close combat, and the other via the wound allocation mechanic by shooting, it is pretty obvious that this is a defining weakness built into our army list, offering plenty of chances for the enemy to maximise combat resolution/cause shooting casualities and thus FORCE MORALE TESTS on us, who just got nerfed in the morale department and weren't good in it before.

 

leaves us with the tropps that are fearless by themselves, thus needing a appropriately marked lord/sorc and paying a lot of points for it, too. so IF you have fearless troops, you're either easy to be deprived of it, or have significantly less troops than your loyalist counterpart.

 

but then again, even fearless is worse than ATSKNF. you can't go to ground and you can't retreat from fights you can't win, regroup and shoot it. but you are immune to pinning at least.

 

now imagine ATSKNF was 25pts troop vexilla/independent character only or cost +3pts per guy...

 

Morale is the Achilles' heel of C:CSM. And sadly, this seems to be our one defining trait.

 

just found this little snippet in our fluff introduction I have to quote:

 

To be a Chaos Space Marine is to feel a godlike power over other creatures. Having long since been freed from physical fear and now released from liability, a Chaos Space Marine does not dread retribution of punishment.

 

he! yeah sure...must have been a copy & paste from the new ward dex...

[Captain Idaho]

There are plenty of problems with the Chaos Codex, but the challenge rules are not one of them. Has anyone actually gone away and played games with the Codex yet? Has anyone had a situation where they were ruined because of the challenge rules?

 

It all seems like Stuart Little syndrome based upon theory-hammer. In practice, you know the opponent can issue you a challenge in your turn too right?

 

You have to accept challenges and issue them. Well if didn't the opponent would just issue one anyway and your character couldn't fight if you refused it. Any time you are likely to lose a challenge is a time you'd send a Champion anyway, so it's not that dramatic.

 

The only time it hurts Chaos is when you're squad hasn't got a champion to take it up on your character's behalf, or when you have a situation where a squad without a champion gets charged by a solo character and you can't use your squad to smash him to pieces but instead just have a single model fight.

 

Does that really happen that often? I've not witnessed any games lost because of it.

[Sception]

1) the opponent cannot issue a challenge in your turn, at least, not against characters with the 'champion of chaos' rule - you have priority for issuing challenges and you are required to do so.

 

2) because you are required to challenge, the opponent need never challenge themselves, they can instead pass and wait to see who they'll be fighting. Let's say you've got a slaaneshi lord with the murder sword and a champ with power fist in combat, and you're engaged against a squad with a terminator sergeant with fist or hammer and a terminator HQ with the relic blade who was the target of your murder sword. Now, your lord would positively slaughter that HQ, and while your champ would fall to the sergeant, he would at least have a decent shot at taking the sergeant with him, allowing the Lord to murder the HQ after.

 

But none of that will ever happen. Because you're required to issue the challenge, the opponent can wait. Challenge with the lord, and he can accept with the sergeant. Since you're only AP2 against his hero and AP3 against everyone else, the champ will shrug off your flailing sword and squish you with his hammer or fist. Challenge with the champ, and he'll accept with the lord, and easily drop your champ before it ever gets a chance to swing, and his sergeant will take your lord out in the following turn.

 

 

That may seem like a worst case scenario, but you asked if any of us had actually played with the book before complaining that the challenge rules screwed us over, and that's how the challenge rules screwed me over in the last game I played. I managed to get my murder lord into combat with his target's unit, and still had no hope of actually engaging him because of the challenge rules.

 

Now, a blinding axe lord or a fisticlaws terminator lord would certainly have done better, but even then the challenge rules are still going to give you some very bad days. I hadn't planned to run Abby in games of less than 3k points, but overpriced or not, I might start breaking that rule just to have a chaos lord that I can run without feeling like I'm dancing on egg shells.

[Minsc]

There are plenty of problems with the Chaos Codex, but the challenge rules are not one of them. Has anyone actually gone away and played games with the Codex yet? Has anyone had a situation where they were ruined because of the challenge rules?

 

Yes, actually.

 

In one of my games, my opponent had a Dakka-tyrant with wings who had landed in order to destroy my Helbrute.

In my turn, I had 10 plaguemarines nearby. Normally, they would've charged, he would have challenged, I would have declined, and then my Plague Marines would've killed the Tyrant with all their poisoned attacks.

What however did happen (I knew it would happen, so my new goal was to just try to lock the Tyrant in place for a turn or two), is that I charged. I had to issue a challenge, he ofcourse accepted and killed my champion, and all my bonus attacks for charging was lost.

On his next turn, he charged the Plaguemarines with a unit of Genestealers and needless to say, they pretty much died. (1 was left standing.), especially since the Tyrant was free to attack normal PM's this turn.

 

Now, if we didn't have to pay heed to this stupid and thoughless Champion of Chaos-rule, the Tyrant would've died, and if my opponent had charged the PM's with his Genestealers, I would have been able to Overwatch, and he would've been affected by defensive grenades. He might even have had to take a diff-test (the fight was on the edge of a river), which would've ment that the PM's actually could've stood a fairly good chance of killing the Genestealers.

 

So in essence:

 

With champion of chaos:

I lost a unit of Plague Marines.

 

Without champion of chaos:

I would've killed a Tyrant and large number of genestealers.

 

TLDR: The Champion of Chaos rule is one of the biggest flaws with the new Codex. It's a horrible rule.

[Captain Idaho]

You missed my point. I'm talking about what would happen if Chaos Marines didn't have to issue or accept challenges. If they didn't, the opponent could still issue one themselves and if the challenge is detrimental to you then you can bet the opponent would have issued it.

 

And your example doesn't show how you were screwed over at all. Firstly the opponent avoided a challenge from you, but this didn't stop you from attacking and killing his models. Did you lose the game? Did you even lose the combat?

 

I bet it didn't ruin anything, it just meant the opponent avoided your assassination attempt.

[the jeske]

Sometimes a weakness has to be a defining feature of a Codex.

yeah there are dex like that . first ogers in WFB , orcs now . SoB or nids . I dont envy their players . being "special" because your book is worse then others is not good . doesnt matter if someone wants to use his dex for tournaments or 1 four way battle against friends per month.

 

 

Crusaders are great, but like I said I've found more tactical use with standard Landraiders. Chaos don't really need the extra space, though it could be nice of course (14 Berzerkers + Lord would scare me!).

your forgeting that our normal LR are smaller then yours and dont have machine . you mentioned using one tank character/sacrificial one and on killer one . well there is a small problem with that , when you can put max 10 dudes in to a LR . also if a tank HQ is taken unlike loyalist we cant get a +3inv and/or +2sv on it .

 

it also makes terminators harder too use , because the squads are too small , in fact it is better to buy more terminators instead of buying a LR and before you say take csm/zerkers . I would like to point out that this means we use up a hvy support slot to take a LR.

 

 

And your example doesn't show how you were screwed over at all. Firstly the opponent avoided a challenge from you, but this didn't stop you from attacking and killing his models.

there is a small problem with killing and chaos , plus there is an off chance our lords will turn in to a spawn or DP[weaker then the lord in hth] . we dont wipe out units fast enough[and melee has its own huge problems this edition] and that is against tacticals . against stuff like GK or GH we run in to a problem of them being offten better or just as good at hth . random chance to win is not a good base to build a hth army[which already is random enough this edition].

 

 

Sure it's a nice bit of kit, but do Ork players moan they can't get a 3+ invulnerable save on their Ork Nobz?

puting aside the orcs not ment for hth in 6th ed argument . an orc nob has 2W , this means he has a better chance of surviving [aka killing with his claw] a dual with a sword champ/sgt etc.

There is no reason ordinary Chaos Marines should be able to withstand an assault from Assault Terminators, or Ork Nobz, or Genestealers.

A why not if they ment for hth/short range[and GH can do it] B they also struggle against GH units of same size . with no visible points difference on the csm side .Also I would like to point out that zerkers which are strickly hth also cant deal with terminators or GH or ork nobz .

[Minsc]

You missed my point. I'm talking about what would happen if Chaos Marines didn't have to issue or accept challenges. If they didn't, the opponent could still issue one themselves and if the challenge is detrimental to you then you can bet the opponent would have issued it.

 

No I did not miss your point, I just (as long as many others it seem) totally dissagree with it.

If we didnt have to issue/accept, we could for instance hide our champions if we knew they would die in vain.

One of the reasons I've stopped taking powerfists on my champions is because they will probably get killed in the first combat anyway.

Our opponents can easily abuse this rule to our disadvantage, and we can't really do anything against it, except try to snipe out our opponents champions before they clash in close combat.

 

Firstly the opponent avoided a challenge from you

 

Did you even read what I wrote?

Since I had to challenge, my 9 other PM's couldn't do anything but to watch the champion die.

If we remove the rule. my opponent might have challenged, but in that case I would've declined, and let my 9 PM's attack instead.

 

but this didn't stop you from attacking and killing his models

 

Umm, that's exactly what it did?

 

Did you lose the game?

 

I don't see how that is in any way relevant for the CoC-rule. Would it make any difference if I answered "yes" or "no"?

 

Did you even lose the combat?

 

Turn 1: I charge. Tyrant kills the champion. I loose but I'm Fearless.

Turn 2: Genestealers charge in, which along with the Tyrant leads to several dead Plague Marines. To few left to make a difference. I loose again, but still Fearless.

Turn 3: The rest of the Plague Marines die. (or the game ended, I don't quite remember, it was some weeks ago.)

 

So yes, I lost the combat. I already painted the scenario for you on what would've happened if the Champion of Chaos-rule didn't exist.

 

And your example doesn't show how you were screwed over at all

 

If loosing a squad of Plague Marines thanks to the CoC-rule, instead of killing a Tyrant and a unit of Genestealers doesn't classify as "getting screwd", I'm not sure what does...

[Hellios]

Don't be pedantic, you knew what I meant. Most armies based upon Imperial/human armies are stuck with unwieldy weapons for AP2.

 

Oh I forgot we all play HumanHammer 40k, where we can ignore any army that isn't based around humans. Most might be more accurate but that is no help when you are in that situation... Anyway if that other guy is rocking a 2+ save then it doesn't really matter if he strikes last... because the people rocking 2+/3++ are the people who can afford to strike last or make you strike last if you want a weapon that can cut through their armor. I've seen a lot more Dark Eldar players using venom blades on HQs now because they don't even try and ignore armor... They try and kill a few of your sergeants by making them fail a boat load of saves and work themselves up to S10... Only then do they want to fight your lord or whatever HQ your army runs (whatever codex).

 

There are plenty of problems with the Chaos Codex, but the challenge rules are not one of them. Has anyone actually gone away and played games with the Codex yet? Has anyone had a situation where they were ruined because of the challenge rules?

 

It all seems like Stuart Little syndrome based upon theory-hammer. In practice, you know the opponent can issue you a challenge in your turn too right?

 

You have to accept challenges and issue them. Well if didn't the opponent would just issue one anyway and your character couldn't fight if you refused it. Any time you are likely to lose a challenge is a time you'd send a Champion anyway, so it's not that dramatic.

 

The only time it hurts Chaos is when you're squad hasn't got a champion to take it up on your character's behalf, or when you have a situation where a squad without a champion gets charged by a solo character and you can't use your squad to smash him to pieces but instead just have a single model fight.

 

Does that really happen that often? I've not witnessed any games lost because of it.

 

So times I might want to refuse a challenge... When the character has a weapon I want to use outside of my current combat, especially when I know he is unlikely to survive the challenge. When the enemy wants me to feed weak characters to him (as in my example with DE, have I had this done to me? No. Have I done it to someone else? Yes.) If my sorcerer is a support character for example... I might not even be taking him to do damage... So him surviving the combat might be far more important than killing a couple of space marines. This sucks even more because if I am keeping a character alive for a specific reason not only can I not hide him but even if I am confident that he will win... I risk the chance of him losing the equipment I wanted by turning into something else... Now if challenges had a way of working out a winner when no one has died and then you rolled on the table at the end of each round with the chaos player being able to modify one of the two dice by 1 (either way) if he won and the other player being able to modify it by 1 (either way) if he lost or having a 'boon' chart for losing challenges and one for winning challenges.

 

As for witnessing games won or lost by a small thing. You might be right... The small things can however can tip you over the edge. I've certainly refused challenges with characters from some of my other armies. My Ethereal being killed would be a big deal for example. Although I also acknowledge that an Ethereal is totally different from any Chaos HQ.

 

The problem is that it is a negative, it isn't very fluffy and chaos characters are not so good that they will almost certainly win (there was a time when Chaos sergeants could cause a problems for HQs belonging to other armies [even marines]) nor is the 'boon' given to chaos sufficiently strong or reliable to make up for it. Some boons are pretty much useless on the wrong person.

 

I am a 1kson player so the boons hit me hard as my sergeants are really expensive I don't get a choice about what upgrades I give them... They come with a force weapon and a psychic power... which is already over costed at that.

 

11-16 - No reward... not the worse reward... Since I still have my expensive sorcerer.

21-22 - Terrible... Spawns are Ok now but I can't lose a sorcerer for a spawn just because I killed an IG my sergeant that I had to fight >.<

24 - Jeez my 1 wound character is loving this, ok if I already have 32 (+1 wound).

44 - Yay I get D3 bonus to my sweep... Oh wait if my unit is alive I cannot sweep...

61 - Fear my fearless and stubborn unit!

62 - Oh fear my for I have fleet! Oh wait my unit cannot run...

 

All of those as far as I'm concerned do nothing for me or actually harm me.

 

The next lot do benefit me but are not so helpful on the whole...

 

34 - being shrouded only really helps me if I'm getting a 2+ cover save or if I've lost my armor save and in cover. Good for a lot of other units I admit, but sadly not for me.

?? - A lot of the +1 is very circumstantial anyway. Yay for my gunmorph and +1 BS now I'm in the combat phase of my game. The ones that help in combat might benefit me at this point but as they can choose who will fight my sorcerer they can do their best to negate this.

53 - Since when you talk about all armies you mean space marines I guess this is useless as I'm already Ld10 and hate space marine anyway.

55 - Errrm I kinda like this one It could be useful if you are fighting Ogryns, tyranid warriors and the like. Against characters? Well apart from not needing to take a psychic test which could make the difference in a game I guess. This is not a huge issue, I will most likely have my warp charge once I'm in combat because the only spell I might be using is boon of chaos... yay!

 

Good boons...

35 - This combined with having a 4++ means that I now possibly have the best sgt for accepting challenges in the game... This doesn't mean I will always want to accept them. Unless I have a force axe I still won't want to fight people with a 2++.

42 - Combined with 35 you are in for a good time.

36/43/54/23/25 - All of these help you wound more often which is good I guess, now I'm in combat. However I don't see combat monster as my sorcerers primary role. Extra strength could be bad if it gets me stuck in combat with something I have little chance of killing. Still overall I like these.

32 - +1W

63 - FNP

 

The best role?

 

64 - Because I have a better chance of getting some of the good ones (or a combination of meh ones that work well together) with no risk of becoming a daemon prince or spawn... Hell have they FAQ'ed this to stop you from getting more multiple boons... because getting endless multiple boons until you have everything but spawn/prince would be pretty sweet.

 

The tough one... Daemon princes are good... and if you have a cheap champion or even a champion who doesn't have any special rules/equipment you really want then this can be a bonus indeed although you can get rare situations when you don't want this. However the expensive the character is to start with or the more boons he has gained the less likely it is that you want this to happen.

 

So 12 outcomes I just don't care or have a negative impact...

 

9 I'm up for...

 

Lots of others that might possibly provide a benefit but I wouldn't write home about them. I am not sure these benefits are worth being forced to put my characters into harms way.

 

Now I do not doubt that others will disagree with me here and if we are talking about applying them to other unit characters or ICs then this list changes. This is just my opinion on how the boon table effects my aspiring sorcerers.

[Captain Idaho]

@ minsc: You're right, I didn't read what you wrote, because it wasn't on my screen when I typed my response to malisteen.

 

@ the jeske: you're taking what I said out of context. I never said anything about the Chaos Codex deserving to be under powered. I've repeatedly stated there are elements of the Codex which are not working. But like I said, a single weakness built into a list doesn't make the list under powered provided there are contrasts to compensate.

 

The challenge rules should not break the game for Chaos players i.e. You shouldn't automatically lose just because of them.

 

Anyway, I'm out of here. We're just going round in circles and won't agree.

[the jeske]

the problem witht he DP boom is that the rules says he changes in to a DP and no where in the DP rules does it say that he has stuff like force/demon weapon/bike/jump pack[i know no one will take those ] etc being turned in to a DP for a sorc or lord is a downgrade , unless someone was runing a naked lord to open up cult troop slots.

[Sception]

And your example doesn't show how you were screwed over at all. Firstly the opponent avoided a challenge from you, but this didn't stop you from attacking and killing his models. Did you lose the game? Did you even lose the combat?

 

I was slaughtered, actually. His hero killed my champion, then his sergeant killed my lord, and my no-longer fearless marines bolted for the hills and were cut down in subsequent turns. Since he got to pick the match ups, there was little I could do. Arguably it was the murder sword as much as the challenge rules that screwed me over, but still, the murder sword is a weapon that is only even conceivably useful in a challenge, and the challenge rules are such that you'll never get to use it.

[Brother Amarel]

There are plenty of problems with the Chaos Codex, but the challenge rules are not one of them. Has anyone actually gone away and played games with the Codex yet? Has anyone had a situation where they were ruined because of the challenge rules?

Just yesterday my CSM with MoK were stopped in their tracks by the inability of my A/C. Seriously, it was against Tau and the rest of the unit wiped out the unit with failed saves to spare, meanwhile my LC-equipped A/C could not get a hit in on the Eternal with them. He made his Morale check and my unit was tied up from Turn 3 to the end of the game as I continually failed to get a wounding hit in. Meanwhile a whole unit of CSM just sat and watched (providing a single re-roll).

 

Aside from that, my opponent always get to react to me - I issue the challenge and he decided who's going to take on the issuer. I've had one, perhaps two, good experiences against ten or more bad ones. It's a horrible, horrible rule.

 

Take a look at the HH: Betrayal book - the EC get an equivalent rule, but in return have access to Crusader on everything, a nice assault unit which all count as Characters and limited +1I for the loss of nothing from the core list. That's how much of a disadvantage it's considered to be.

 

And having to pay for VotLW it's naff as well. The more lists I play against (of various races) the more I dislike the large advantage it gives against one 'race' and the points disadvantage it gives against everyone else.

[Vesper]

Still playing 3.5 here !

Yet I have to admit I'm done with 40K. GW can't (doesn't want) to make things right for Chaos. I'm now sure of it. So I don't have any reason left to play such a boring and ill designed (read totally imbalanced) super expensive game/hobby.

 

Things have changed since I started. 40k now suck badly.

[Rune Priest Ridcully]

^^^^ And I think even the loyalist players are starting to get embarrassed by the overwhelming bias in their favor in the rules..

[Smurfalypse]

And your example doesn't show how you were screwed over at all. Firstly the opponent avoided a challenge from you, but this didn't stop you from attacking and killing his models. Did you lose the game? Did you even lose the combat?

 

I was slaughtered, actually. His hero killed my champion, then his sergeant killed my lord, and my no-longer fearless marines bolted for the hills and were cut down in subsequent turns. Since he got to pick the match ups, there was little I could do. Arguably it was the murder sword as much as the challenge rules that screwed me over, but still, the murder sword is a weapon that is only even conceivably useful in a challenge, and the challenge rules are such that you'll never get to use it.

 

It is a rule in the codex you have to work around. You cannot give your Lord trash items or run him around near naked KNOWING you will fight in challenges everytime in CC. That is just the way of it.

 

I agree with the guy with the Optimus Prime logo, there are issues with this codex, that is such a minor thing that I dont even think it registers.

 

Just to point out that I create my Lord at a total of usually 160ish points every game I run him, and he has yet to lose in CC to anyone. That includes Calgar, any assortment of Squad Leaders and Walkers. Not bragging, just saying that you KNOW it is going to happen, build for it or stay out of CC. When he dies it is 100% due to eating some ranged fire after the squad he is with has died.

[Azekai]

Still playing 3.5 here !

Yet I have to admit I'm done with 40K. GW can't (doesn't want) to make things right for Chaos. I'm now sure of it. So I don't have any reason left to play such a boring and ill designed (read totally imbalanced) super expensive game/hobby.

 

Things have changed since I started. 40k now suck badly.

Eh, people say that with every iteration of the rules . . . but I still think you are correct in this case.

 

6th was bad enough- hull points, premeasuring, fliers being stupid resilient, challenges, wound allocation that forces everyone to micro-manage the placement of every model, barrage sniping, useless deathtrap transports . . . I could go on and on. The rules award people for doing stupid things. For crying out loud people don't ride in rhinos any more, they run behind them! Madness!

 

C:CSM just piled on more bad/nonsensical rules on us (congratulations on your daemonic ascendency! Now strip down and fight those guys naked!)

Going back to 3.5 sounds refreshing.

[the jeske]

Just to point out that I create my Lord at a total of usually 160ish points every game I run him, and he has yet to lose in CC to anyone. That includes Calgar, any assortment of Squad Leaders and Walkers. Not bragging, just saying that you KNOW it is going to happen, build for it or stay out of CC. When he dies it is 100% due to eating some ranged fire after the squad he is with has died.

how does that happen , I mean the being shot up part , when you seem to be rolling invisibilty every time , never facing armies with rune staffs or eldar runes ? And how a mace lord kills calgar before he manages to kill him [when calgar means honor guard or termi bodyguard so your bike unit for him just got stuck in a +2sv tar pit with power weapons/thunder hammers] is very interesting. See am realy bad at math and I somehow dont see how that happens.

 

 

And I think even the loyalist players are starting to get embarrassed by the overwhelming bias in their favor in the rules..

I have never met anyone who would have problems with his codex working and someone elses working worse or not at all .

[Minsc]

(congratulations on your daemonic ascendency! Now strip down and fight those guys naked!)

 

Ah, I can see clearly now. I must strip, strip for Chaos!

[Hellios]

(congratulations on your daemonic ascendency! Now strip down and fight those guys naked!)

 

Ah, I can see clearly now. I must strip, strip for Chaos!

 

Apparently Slaanesh favours you :()

[Smurfalypse]

Just to point out that I create my Lord at a total of usually 160ish points every game I run him, and he has yet to lose in CC to anyone. That includes Calgar, any assortment of Squad Leaders and Walkers. Not bragging, just saying that you KNOW it is going to happen, build for it or stay out of CC. When he dies it is 100% due to eating some ranged fire after the squad he is with has died.

how does that happen , I mean the being shot up part , when you seem to be rolling invisibilty every time , never facing armies with rune staffs or eldar runes ? And how a mace lord kills calgar before he manages to kill him [when calgar means honor guard or termi bodyguard so your bike unit for him just got stuck in a +2sv tar pit with power weapons/thunder hammers] is very interesting. See am realy bad at math and I somehow dont see how that happens.

 

 

And I think even the loyalist players are starting to get embarrassed by the overwhelming bias in their favor in the rules..

I have never met anyone who would have problems with his codex working and someone elses working worse or not at all .

 

I have only gotten invs four or five times out of my 13 or so games, heck a few times I didnt even roll on Telepathy as Biomancy is just as good IMO. Though I do find the leadership effecting stuff from Telepathy very useful in most games.

My Bikers are a threat to everyone (as they should be) so all fire goes to them from the enemy usually. The Lord has died a few times when the squad was wittled down over time and in the end (turn five or six) he is the only one left and ends up getting punked.

 

The Calgar thing was fairly surprising I have to admit, but it happened. My Bikers rolled up a few inches away from the LR, killed it with a few meltagun shots, Calgar and company got out and stood in wreckage, two plasma cannon shots in the middle to soften em up (only killed two), then I assaulted. I challenged with my Lord, he accepted with Calgar. GG. Lasted two rounds and Calgar died the second, I took one wound in return. One turn he failed two T checks and the second he failed 2 T checks, so lost three guys on initiative 5 to the mace each round of combat. This was a game I did indeed have invis so everything needed 5s to hit me.

 

Interesting how you would take such an interest in that and not how someone is using the fact that his Lord lost to a sgt in CC somehow, and then uses that as an example of why a mechanic is bad :(

[Lord_Starscream]

Have you guys also considered the problem that 40k is an incredibly crappy medium to host tournaments in?

 

Its rules have NEVER been tournament centric. Their inconsistencies are too great, and the game is flat for such things. The game is meant to be enjoyed.

 

"omg, you can't win at ALL unless you field X, Y, Z."

 

This in my opinion, is the single worst thing to happen to the hobby. Its these kinds of shallow, tournament only mindsets that ruin this game. Why not build a World Eater Army... for the enjoyment, of building a world eater army? Playing it for what it is. Playing what you want to play. Having the units that you like and enjoy. Having the characters and story for your army that you enjoy. No, instead, people go to forums and look for the most mathammered units or armies possible, and declare other things irreverent.

 

And because those people do it? The people they run into either leave the hobby as they are tired of getting math hammered into the floor when in reality they just wanted a fun game of their Ork Big Mek's Waaagh that had a bunch of Burna Boyz it in, and fought a tournament list Dragowing, or they start building their own tournament lists, changing armies or tactics radically... for the sake of not being killed off the bat.

 

The stifling of creativity the 40k community has allowed, the stifling of people who just want to enjoy their games, is absolutely revolting. I rarely see "friendly" games, because enough douchebags play games regionally that everyone feels the need to always be ready to play against power gaming tourney players. The tournaments are pointless guys, completely, and absolutely pointless. They are tournaments hosting in a gaming system that is in no way meant for tournament play. Its designed for either when your having a beer with some friends in the basement, or playing out a story for your army, which you built.

 

And I used to be pretty active in the tournament scene locally as a teenager, and I was *very* successful at it from 2nd-4th edition. I'm not at all anymore because I've just learned this game isn't meant for this kind of play. And the communities encouragement of the most kick ass, math hammered armies has stained this game, badly.

[Hellios]

Have you guys also considered the problem that 40k is an incredibly crappy medium to host tournaments in?

 

Its rules have NEVER been tournament centric. Their inconsistencies are too great, and the game is flat for such things. The game is meant to be enjoyed.

 

"omg, you can't win at ALL unless you field X, Y, Z."

 

This in my opinion, is the single worst thing to happen to the hobby. Its these kinds of shallow, tournament only mindsets that ruin this game. Why not build a World Eater Army... for the enjoyment, of building a world eater army? Playing it for what it is. Playing what you want to play. Having the units that you like and enjoy. Having the characters and story for your army that you enjoy. No, instead, people go to forums and look for the most mathammered units or armies possible, and declare other things irreverent.

 

And because those people do it? The people they run into either leave the hobby as they are tired of getting math hammered into the floor when in reality they just wanted a fun game of their Ork Big Mek's Waaagh that had a bunch of Burna Boyz it in, and fought a tournament list Dragowing, or they start building their own tournament lists, changing armies or tactics radically... for the sake of not being killed off the bat.

 

The stifling of creativity the 40k community has allowed, the stifling of people who just want to enjoy their games, is absolutely revolting. I rarely see "friendly" games, because enough douchebags play games regionally that everyone feels the need to always be ready to play against power gaming tourney players. The tournaments are pointless guys, completely, and absolutely pointless. They are tournaments hosting in a gaming system that is in no way meant for tournament play. Its designed for either when your having a beer with some friends in the basement, or playing out a story for your army, which you built.

 

And I used to be pretty active in the tournament scene locally as a teenager, and I was *very* successful at it from 2nd-4th edition. I'm not at all anymore because I've just learned this game isn't meant for this kind of play. And the communities encouragement of the most kick ass, math hammered armies has stained this game, badly.

 

While I agree with the idea behind your statement... Wouldn't it be nice if GW put some more care into crafting the rules so that the game had better balance. Where my fluff list is likely to do as well as any other list. That is only half the problem the other being that the codex doesn't provide some of the things we really want. In my case rubric terminators... I'm not even asking for them to be good...I just want some :'(