Agerjag Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 I dont think that legion rules are the direction that 40k is going. The legions are not really together anymore. Heck taking Ahriman and a TSons army is odd because he was exiled. Its fun to play some heresy games, but I think that warbands and crusades are the direction things are going. As we have seen for the last few years. In one sense it lets you make your warband whatever you want, your not really held down by the fluff to any degree and you can specialize and make your own story. My favorite army for example (non-tournament of course) is ahriman and his band of misfit exiles that hes won over or manipulated into helping him with his quest for knowledge. You can really go any direction. I dont think that "Chaos" is meant to be as structured as the loyalists. Sometimes that leads us to some unfortunate random rules. Random charts is synonymous to chaos type of thing. But overall I like the direction. Forge World looks to be doing some great heresy stuff so if thats your cup of tea then thats what I would suggest. Ahriman was joined by a number of other sorcerers from the 1ksons and the Rubrics they control, because many of the sorcerers in the 1ksons were dissatisfied with Magnus's leadership. Hence why so many of them secretly joined with him to cast the Rubric... Although obviously he would have lost favour with some of these when the Rubric went 'wrong'. Ahriman probably has the second largest group of 1ksons under his control, second to those who still call the planet of sorcerers home. Thats true, but given how often hes just running around its unlikely that he would be leading more then unit or two. Most of his lore just says he takes promising psykers and forms his band out of those, though we dont really have coven rules....maybe they will white dwarf someday, we can always hope. Unless you're extremely careful with your points, then yes we are suboptimal in many aspects. Since you seem to only take bits and peices of what I write I assume you can't read that well so I'll say it again, the codex isn't terrible it's simply lackluster. There's pretty much no one here that plays chaos just for the rules. We all play it for the modeling purposes or because we love the fluff. As for your readings, see the above. And im disagreeing with you, there are things that could be fixed yes, but this codex and its "power level" are exactly what I think things should be like.New codices should bring new levels of variance and this one has. Im pretty impressed with this codex over the last one, especially when the last one took so many options away. I would even call it an optimal codex because we have no easy I win buttons and have to use thought and strategy...in a table top strategy game. The lore of course is very rich and is what caused me to play chaos in the first place. I will still build themed armies and find a way to make them playable(not top tier competitive). Ive read everything that you have written in this thread, and I only respond to the things that matter and that I have an opinion on, as we all do. I read quite fine but obviously missed the part in the codex where your opinions invalidate all others ideas because you are a lifer that understands these things better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Ambroz Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 And im disagreeing with you, there are things that could be fixed yes, but this codex and its "power level" are exactly what I think things should be like.New codices should bring new levels of variance and this one has. Im pretty impressed with this codex over the last one, especially when the last one took so many options away. I would even call it an optimal codex because we have no easy I win buttons and have to use thought and strategy...in a table top strategy game. The lore of course is very rich and is what caused me to play chaos in the first place. I will still build themed armies and find a way to make them playable(not top tier competitive). Ive read everything that you have written in this thread, and I only respond to the things that matter and that I have an opinion on, as we all do. I read quite fine but obviously missed the part in the codex where your opinions invalidate all others ideas because you are a lifer that understands these things better. I wouldn't mind if this was the new "trend" in codex books but as it's been said already I doubt it will be. DA will likely be Ward's new "codex of awesome" and ours will be back at the end of the line once more. Well if you do read it, you choose to ignore it or come up with random "wrist cutting" things out of nowhere. Once again I'm not sure about your reading because I never said your opinions were worthless but then you're still just taking certain sentences out of context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rune Priest Ridcully Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 I dont think that legion rules are the direction that 40k is going. The legions are not really together anymore. Heck taking Ahriman and a TSons army is odd because he was exiled. Its fun to play some heresy games, but I think that warbands and crusades are the direction things are going. As we have seen for the last few years. In one sense it lets you make your warband whatever you want, your not really held down by the fluff to any degree and you can specialize and make your own story. My favorite army for example (non-tournament of course) is ahriman and his band of misfit exiles that hes won over or manipulated into helping him with his quest for knowledge. You can really go any direction. I dont think that "Chaos" is meant to be as structured as the loyalists. Sometimes that leads us to some unfortunate random rules. Random charts is synonymous to chaos type of thing. But overall I like the direction. Forge World looks to be doing some great heresy stuff so if thats your cup of tea then thats what I would suggest. Ahriman was joined by a number of other sorcerers from the 1ksons and the Rubrics they control, because many of the sorcerers in the 1ksons were dissatisfied with Magnus's leadership. Hence why so many of them secretly joined with him to cast the Rubric... Although obviously he would have lost favour with some of these when the Rubric went 'wrong'. Ahriman probably has the second largest group of 1ksons under his control, second to those who still call the planet of sorcerers home. I think Ahirman has the biggest group, our failure of a primarch was apply to waste his part of the legion in smashing the fang. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurfalypse Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 I am NOT defending the current one, and I am certainly not defending the previous one but if you cannot objectively look at that codex and see how wrong it was, then you cannot see anything clearly. It dominated way harder in its hayday than anything we have EVER seen in 40k, and it did it with 4 or 5 viable builds, all greater than anything else anyone could hope to field. Stuff like Nidzilla and Eldar Circus were doing fine against Daemon Bomb (the only OTT build of 3.5, among dozen possibilities). The game was fine, back then. If you think that its the most broken book GW ever printed, I've got some useful links for you : http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/...Id=prod1380029a http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/...dId=prod2010055 http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/...Id=prod1140056a http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/...dId=prod330011a The reason the game is a piece of crap at this very moment is that some armies can break the mechanics of the game to make sure they win. Necron flyer list in a game where most armies can't even get Flakk without making use of allies ? Most retarded thing ever. GK spell that prevent any daemon unit to make it to the table ? Someone just missed the gaming part in the concept of "game". And so on. Needless to say, throw some indecent prices, in $ and in points, a vain edition that is poorly made with some of the worst ideas ever (challenges !), silly new designs (dreadknight, our fiends and flyer, thunderwolves...), no playtesting, retarded release policy... and the game just feels like a freaking waste of time and money. Personally I would not want to go back to 3.5. I like being able to field different cult-troops in the same army. It was perfectly doable with the base list. I admit it was an error to put mark restrictions to legion lists, but hey, can't be perfect. In the end, let's not turn this topic in another 3.5-related talk. I am not saying that certain armies right now are not "broken", I have NEVER said that. I am saying that you are not looking at the CSM 3.5 codex objectively, it kicked ass therefor it was okay for you. Never mind the poor sap you trounced over and over with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurfalypse Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 I am NOT defending the current one, and I am certainly not defending the previous one but if you cannot objectively look at that codex and see how wrong it was, then you cannot see anything clearly. It dominated way harder in its hayday than anything we have EVER seen in 40k, and it did it with 4 or 5 viable builds, all greater than anything else anyone could hope to field. I played a pure Thousand Sons army back then. I wouldn't exactly call them OP, neither by 2004 or by 2012 standards. :tu: 3.5 was fine except for heavy support-spamming Iron Warriors and some certain combos/builds. It was abuseable though, so I partially agree with you. If someone brings up 3.5, they must be objective. Personally I would not want to go back to 3.5. I like being able to field different cult-troops in the same army. Again, I never specified an exact list but since you want exacts that is fine. The fact that you think the IW spamming heaves was the biggest issue shows the ignorance (no offense meant, just saying that you truly do not understand what all was good in the 3.5 codex) toward that book. Daemon Bomb was the primary issue with that book, plain and simple. Everything else that was just "good" completely paled in comparison to the daemons coming at someone. Either way, I am don't talking about it. I apologize for responding but someone else had brought it up. I know the thread is about something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 I am NOT defending the current one, and I am certainly not defending the previous one but if you cannot objectively look at that codex and see how wrong it was, then you cannot see anything clearly. It dominated way harder in its hayday than anything we have EVER seen in 40k, and it did it with 4 or 5 viable builds, all greater than anything else anyone could hope to field. Stuff like Nidzilla and Eldar Circus were doing fine against Daemon Bomb (the only OTT build of 3.5, among dozen possibilities). The game was fine, back then. If you think that its the most broken book GW ever printed, I've got some useful links for you : http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/...Id=prod1380029a http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/...dId=prod2010055 http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/...Id=prod1140056a http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/...dId=prod330011a The reason the game is a piece of crap at this very moment is that some armies can break the mechanics of the game to make sure they win. Necron flyer list in a game where most armies can't even get Flakk without making use of allies ? Most retarded thing ever. GK spell that prevent any daemon unit to make it to the table ? Someone just missed the gaming part in the concept of "game". And so on. Needless to say, throw some indecent prices, in $ and in points, a vain edition that is poorly made with some of the worst ideas ever (challenges !), silly new designs (dreadknight, our fiends and flyer, thunderwolves...), no playtesting, retarded release policy... and the game just feels like a freaking waste of time and money. Personally I would not want to go back to 3.5. I like being able to field different cult-troops in the same army. It was perfectly doable with the base list. I admit it was an error to put mark restrictions to legion lists, but hey, can't be perfect. In the end, let's not turn this topic in another 3.5-related talk. I am not saying that certain armies right now are not "broken", I have NEVER said that. I am saying that you are not looking at the CSM 3.5 codex objectively, it kicked ass therefor it was okay for you. Never mind the poor sap you trounced over and over with it. With 3.5, I've won and I've lost my fair part. I am not an harcore WAAC guy, as I prefer super cool balanced battles backed up with fluff. The cool thing with 3.5 wasn't its power level. And, excuse me but you were wrong, as Nidzilla and Eldar Circus, to name them, were superior to Daemon Bomb. The game was much better balanced and designed back in 3rd and 4th than it is now, even with Eldar Circus, 3.5 and stuff. And maybe that is part of why it was ok for me to play back then. The game used to be fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Izhim ur-Baal Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Again, I never specified an exact list but since you want exacts that is fine. The fact that you think the IW spamming heaves was the biggest issue shows the ignorance (no offense meant, just saying that you truly do not understand what all was good in the 3.5 codex) toward that book. Daemon Bomb was the primary issue with that book, plain and simple. Everything else that was just "good" completely paled in comparison to the daemons coming at someone. Either way, I am don't talking about it. I apologize for responding but someone else had brought it up. I know the thread is about something else. In 3.5 edition codex you had: -Alpha Legion infiltration -Khornate Generic Chaos -IW heavy spam "gunline" -Siren demonbomb -Khorne demonbomb -Noise spam Every of those played well, and had unique playstyle. There were also many T2 archetypes like DG or WB lists that did just ok. You were able to go mech, footslog, infiltrate or even use assault after deep-strike units. The real problem lies in: -lack of internal balance in unit's options (chain axes ?) -lack of internal balance between units (cc oblits, really ?) -lack of deployment options -lackluster transport options (crap upgrades, just 2 choices and LR with 10 seats ?) -lack of tricks -stupid forced challenge with not really rewarding table (but why not, keep the table - but why i am forced to go into challenge when i'm with my entire squad any enemy is alone - entire challenge rules are bad anyway, it's not author's fault) -no real upgrades to buildings or chaos buildings -no real anti-aircraft -WHERE ARE OUR DROP PODS AND WHIRLWINDS ? Overall it's very uninspiring. But the main problem are people like A-B-D who throw all lesser gods to the bin, tell us they don't exist and force us to give our daemon princes mark (yeah, counts as - but i don't want to counts as) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deiros Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Well, I see the new chaos book from a friend, but as my first chaos legion I picked the Alpha Legion, because of their nice fluff and their color scheme (is a pain in the arse to make for me). I use the Siege of Vrakks alpha legions as my "cult squad" and the Special character option presented there also as the Alpha Legion IC. There is also a new night lord player, but he is using his Blood Angels codex to make a count as Night Lords and he has a very nice small 5 man units of assault marines as the core led by some fluffy (sanguine priest) and just doesn't include Death Company (yet) as he finds them somewhat unfluffy for his use. I do believe you are able to represent a renegade chapter perfectly fine with the current chaos dex as well as some legions to a certain point. Those legions that you can't do represent properly you can just use like a heathen that I know, that uses Dark Angels book to represent his Fallen Angels instead of the chaos dex. Yes, I do have to use a generic CSM and regular CSM when someone doesn't let me use my IA: SoV alpha legion squad and IC. (which is sad). The hard part to represent are Chaos Cults, like a Cultits Lord choice, cultist sorcerers, assassins and such other things. A renegade Imperial Army, just use the regular codex for them and paint them and do conversions or bitz for them. You may also try the IA:SoV rules for a renegade imperial army too. IA:SoV = Imperial Armor: Siege of Vrakks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baluc Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Again, I never specified an exact list but since you want exacts that is fine. The fact that you think the IW spamming heaves was the biggest issue shows the ignorance (no offense meant, just saying that you truly do not understand what all was good in the 3.5 codex) toward that book. Daemon Bomb was the primary issue with that book, plain and simple. Everything else that was just "good" completely paled in comparison to the daemons coming at someone. Either way, I am don't talking about it. I apologize for responding but someone else had brought it up. I know the thread is about something else. In 3.5 edition codex you had: -Alpha Legion infiltration -Khornate Generic Chaos -IW heavy spam "gunline" -Siren demonbomb -Khorne demonbomb -Noise spam Every of those played well, and had unique playstyle. There were also many T2 archetypes like DG or WB lists that did just ok. You were able to go mech, footslog, infiltrate or even use assault after deep-strike units. The real problem lies in: -lack of internal balance in unit's options (chain axes ?) -lack of internal balance between units (cc oblits, really ?) -lack of deployment options -lackluster transport options (crap upgrades, just 2 choices and LR with 10 seats ?) -lack of tricks -stupid forced challenge with not really rewarding table (but why not, keep the table - but why i am forced to go into challenge when i'm with my entire squad any enemy is alone - entire challenge rules are bad anyway, it's not author's fault) -no real upgrades to buildings or chaos buildings -no real anti-aircraft -WHERE ARE OUR DROP PODS AND WHIRLWINDS ? Overall it's very uninspiring. But the main problem are people like A-B-D who throw all lesser gods to the bin, tell us they don't exist and force us to give our daemon princes mark (yeah, counts as - but i don't want to counts as) 3.5 did more harm to chaos, and chaos players in the long term than any singular event in the history of mankind. That anyone could think that 3rd and 4th were balanced editions literally blows my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kol Saresk Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Gee I thought this topic was to discuss problems and improvements with this Codex, not reminiscing on 3.5. Wasn't there a warning from the mods on that? Or was I the only one who saw that? :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Izhim ur-Baal Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 3.5 did more harm to chaos, and chaos players in the long term than any singular event in the history of mankind. That anyone could think that 3rd and 4th were balanced editions literally blows my mind. I disagree, 3.5 chaos wasn't that dominating, you had many strong units. Maybe it wasn't that balanced in 3rd edition as it was in 4th, but compared to other armies out there it was more diverse and on par in power level (in 4th ed.). 3.5 edition codex gave chaos way more players than currently play the army. Just like current SW, Cron and GK codices do, and like Eldar, BA, Tyranids and SM did in the past. 3rd edition wasn't balanced, 4th edition wasn't balanced, 5th edition wasn't balanced, 6th edition is unbalanced as well. See the pattern ? All of them had their issues, many of them were shared by multiple edition due to GW's urge to keep using 3rd edition as a base with various patches that make the system not fun, not intuitive and slow. But back to the topic, GW just can't do it right and keep releasing just units in codices they have models for, which hurt chaos a lot. This is main problem. We aren't SM who get 100002321321 models of the same unit, which is in 5 different SM codices who don't deserve their own codex anyway (SW, DA, BA, BT - yes, they are less diverse than chaos and it would be possible to do them all in one codex)(which would reduce number of codices overall, which means they would be updated faster - and GK, SoB, and Inquisition would be perfect choice for second imperial codex, third would be imperial guard - 3 imperial, 3 chaos, 2 eldars, 1 for others). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baluc Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 3.5 did more harm to chaos, and chaos players in the long term than any singular event in the history of mankind. That anyone could think that 3rd and 4th were balanced editions literally blows my mind. I disagree, 3.5 chaos wasn't that dominating, you had many strong units. Maybe it wasn't that balanced in 3rd edition as it was in 4th, but compared to other armies out there it was more diverse and on par in power level (in 4th ed.). 3.5 edition codex gave chaos way more players than currently play the army. Just like current SW, Cron and GK codices do, and like Eldar, BA, Tyranids and SM did in the past. 3rd edition wasn't balanced, 4th edition wasn't balanced, 5th edition wasn't balanced, 6th edition is unbalanced as well. See the pattern ? All of them had their issues, many of them were shared by multiple edition due to GW's urge to keep using 3rd edition as a base with various patches that make the system not fun, not intuitive and slow. But back to the topic, GW just can't do it right and keep releasing just units in codices they have models for, which hurt chaos a lot. This is main problem. We aren't SM who get 100002321321 models of the same unit, which is in 5 different SM codices who don't deserve their own codex anyway (SW, DA, BA, BT - yes, they are less diverse than chaos and it would be possible to do them all in one codex). Its all about perspective. As I see it there are a few types of chaos players. 1. Those who play "chaos space marines", they open the book and anything is an option, they are not afriad something is going to jump out of the closet if they take a tznt squad and a nurgle squad and paint them like slaanesh. 2. Those who mix and match and paint them as such. 3. Those who play mono-god, who just want a visual theme and play a certain way, but behind the scenes on their list they are going to mix and match marks. Their helldrake might just be the FW Helltalon of Hellblade. 4. Those who play mono-god and nothing can be not marked, or a different mark regardless of visual 5. Those who who will not under pain of death use a unit that didn't exist in 3.5 6. Those who won't ever take a "not point effective" unit on principle, unless its drawn out the unit has a use. 7. Those who won't ever take a "not point effective" unit ever, like come heaven and high hell, kind of never. Types 1-3 are all verying types of happy. 4-7 probably think this is the worst book since... well ever. GW probably wrote the book from #3's point of view to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kastor Krieg Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 That's my conclusion, too. I am definitely #3. I run a "Tzeentchy kSons" army, but then again I got TK Prince Apophas as my "Typhus" counts-as and test my kSon models with Plague Marines rules. Or I run a Nurgle Bike Lord with Black Mas, as 2nd HQ, aside from Ahriman + kSon, and surround him with Nurgle Spawns made from Vampire Counts Dire Wolves - five of them bright pink, the other baby blue. The next day I use my Sarpedon Marine-meets-Forest-Goblin-Spider-body kitbashed model as a Slaanesh Sorcerer on a bike and test my kSons as "Noise Marines". Still, I play "Thousand Sons" and my Heldrake is lime green with warm gold detail. I love this dex, despite seeing its weaknesses and hoping for a FAQ kicking out its inconsistencies (like they already did with the Khorne Daemon Prince and the Axe). I hate kSons not being Relentless instead, the lack of Overwatch and Run is really bothersome. I'd love to at least be able to remove SnP with the Biomancy spell, making them Relentless _INSTEAD_ of SnP, not "stacking and doing nothing at all". There's a multitude of options. The Oblits are butt-ugly, but I will kitbash my own ones out of Ushabti and these will rule. I am making a "Horus-headed" Daemon Prince out of itself and an Island of Blood Gryphon. I lost most of my games so far, but I'm starting to learn to make up for the mathammer problems with my tactics. I started to use distance to my advantade, place and move units more tactically, I'm getting better at it. All the while, the 'dex is getting me really inspired to come up with new kitbashes, find use for new non-CSM models in my army and generally have a huge heap of utter FUN-FUN-FUN with it. And isn't this what it's all about, after all? :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperors Immortals Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Yeah i agree asa happy 1 . what i am upset by is lack of pods and or assault vehicle for under 200 pts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kol Saresk Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 No, the problem with 3.5 is from a fluff perspective. And a power perspective. Everyone agrees that it won. A lot. When Chaos players who have been playing since 3.5 look back at it, the y do so not out of nostalgia, but out of desperation. Because the reality is that they see this edition and go "It sucks." This is what I am seeing everywhere. And the statement is very closely followed by "I want 3.5 back." in one form or another. Everyone goes "I want Legion lists." But their Legion lists are 3.5's Legion lists. I find it ironic that everyone's way of dealing with the problem is "I want fluffy Night Lords, so I'm going to BA to spam Count-As Raptors." Or "I want a fluffy Iron Warriors artillery army, so I'm running to Forgeworld's Legions to spam Basilisks and Medusas." And it's funny to me because one of the very complaints aimed at me specifically was It was a powerhouse in a wrong way ? Having more viable builds than the sum of those all the other codices got is a "wrong" way ? You must really enjoy spamming units, I guess. And that was in defense of 3.5. Let's see, the nine "legion" lists and what exactly were they used for? Night Lords: Used as the "Raptor Legion". When most people think of a "fluffy" Night Lords list, they expect Raptors. Not Stealth, not Fear, not even Night Vision. They expect no Marks at all and Raptors. Alpha Legion: They expect Infiltrate and Cultists. Most people today when they build a list in this edition, do so with at the very least, Infiltrate in mind. Now, Infiltrate could lead to a somewhat diverse army, as I believe all Infantry units had this option. Wait, let me double check. Hmm, not sure. Wording is Any Alpha Legion Chaos Space Marine in power armour(or Daemon armour) on foot may have the Infiltration skill at a cost of +5 points for independent characters or +1 per other model. So since IC are included, I'm inclined to say that all CSM Infantry units in an AL army had it availabe. The only drawback was that if you went Infiltrate heavy, you also went Infantry heavy. World Eaters: This one is too easy. Just think of a modern World Eaters army. That's right, Berzerkers galore. Death Guard: Spam Plague Marines. Thousand Sons: Spam Thousand Sons. Emperor's Children: I believe all EC fans who are veterans of 3.5 remember NM lists in fondness. Iron Warriors: Used to Spam HS slots. Word Bearers: I believe the term "Daemon Bomb" is a very well known list, yes? Black Legion: This is the only one I don't know simply because everything, literally everything, qualifies as a Black Legion list because the Black Legion is an amalgamation of all that is Chaos. So, there are the eight Spam lists. With everything except the Daemon Bomb and Heavy Support spam, all of these lists can be represented to one or the other without allies. With allies, the Daemon Bomb and Heavy Support make a comeback. The Raptor Spam can make a comeback by allying a BA jump pack army. The onyl army that truly suffers, is the Infiltrate Spam, simply because Infiltrate cannot be spread around that much anymore. Unless you go the Heresy lists, and take two compulsory Troops that do not have Infiltrate, as I believe every Troop option that does have Infiltrate is a "Support" unit, so it cannot fill the Compulsory slot. But yes, 3.5 did have 8 varying lists. And while they didn't have to be used as SPAM lists, that's pretty much all they were used for. Seriously, look at the lists in the build section. Find me 20 Night Lords lists written by 20 different authors that do not try to spam Raptors, or go count-as BA and spam Assault Marines(before advice is given). If you can do that, I will shut up about 3.5. And by spam, I mean more than two units. It is going to be a hard thing to do. The point is, very few people who have problems with this Codex, don't want to fix it. They just want to go back to 3.5. Judging by pretty much everyone's reactions here and on other websites. Sure, they may hide it behind "I want Legion lists back", but the Legion list they want is 3.5 and unless it is just as viable, it isn't good enough. Now, Malisteen and Jeske did very kindly point out most of the problems with this Codex, such as entirely missing options that should be there and units that would be better at least with points reductions. While it is externally balanced(as pointed out by the fact that there are different lists running around, winning and losing against just about every army except Necrons[i say that because I haven't seen any battle reports at all against Necrons. At least I don't think I have.]), it is internal unbalanced. A weird, haphazard combination, but it is working for the moment. And I am willing to bet that at least one of these two have ideas on how to actually improve this Codex to make it "unique" instead of a 3.5 wanna be. Personally, I agree with Baluc's assessment of the different "groups" of players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesper Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Again, I never specified an exact list but since you want exacts that is fine. The fact that you think the IW spamming heaves was the biggest issue shows the ignorance (no offense meant, just saying that you truly do not understand what all was good in the 3.5 codex) toward that book. Daemon Bomb was the primary issue with that book, plain and simple. Everything else that was just "good" completely paled in comparison to the daemons coming at someone. Either way, I am don't talking about it. I apologize for responding but someone else had brought it up. I know the thread is about something else. In 3.5 edition codex you had: -Alpha Legion infiltration -Khornate Generic Chaos -IW heavy spam "gunline" -Siren demonbomb -Khorne demonbomb -Noise spam Every of those played well, and had unique playstyle. There were also many T2 archetypes like DG or WB lists that did just ok. You were able to go mech, footslog, infiltrate or even use assault after deep-strike units. The real problem lies in: -lack of internal balance in unit's options (chain axes ?) -lack of internal balance between units (cc oblits, really ?) -lack of deployment options -lackluster transport options (crap upgrades, just 2 choices and LR with 10 seats ?) -lack of tricks -stupid forced challenge with not really rewarding table (but why not, keep the table - but why i am forced to go into challenge when i'm with my entire squad any enemy is alone - entire challenge rules are bad anyway, it's not author's fault) -no real upgrades to buildings or chaos buildings -no real anti-aircraft -WHERE ARE OUR DROP PODS AND WHIRLWINDS ? Overall it's very uninspiring. But the main problem are people like A-B-D who throw all lesser gods to the bin, tell us they don't exist and force us to give our daemon princes mark (yeah, counts as - but i don't want to counts as) Welcome. So since IC are included, I'm inclined to say that all CSM Infantry units in an AL army had it availabe. The only drawback was that if you went Infiltrate heavy, you also went Infantry heavy.World Eaters: This one is too easy. Just think of a modern World Eaters army. That's right, Berzerkers galore. Death Guard: Spam Plague Marines. Thousand Sons: Spam Thousand Sons. Emperor's Children: I believe all EC fans who are veterans of 3.5 remember NM lists in fondness. Iron Warriors: Used to Spam HS slots. Word Bearers: I believe the term "Daemon Bomb" is a very well known list, yes? Black Legion: This is the only one I don't know simply because everything, literally everything, qualifies as a Black Legion list because the Black Legion is an amalgamation of all that is Chaos. Those aren't spam, those are themes (that you were free to adopt or not). AL infantry heavy ? That is spam ? So, if I get miniatures on the table, that's spam ? WE ? Back then, vehicles could be marked, so vehicles, CSMs, Havocs, Berzerkers, Khorne lord on jugger or somethin'... Etc. DG TS EC same with their gods tweaks and spells and arsenal... IW, gunline, good at blowing things up. Cool stuff like servo arms. WB Daemon stuff. BL, basic CSM list without any restriction, for those who want to mix things up at will. The writers tried to stay true to the IA fluff. At the end of the day, the Chaos player had tons of way to play his army. His Iron Warriors could go classical gunline or play with the Book of Khorne rules... Or whatever we wanted. But that's right, 3.5 damaged Chaos to the bone. It was such a marvel than every coming book will look like a pathetic bland crap. That was the case of the Gavdex, that is the case for the new dex where there's no real theme. What does your army have in store to stand out from another Chaos army ? Nothing. What does every Chaos army got in store to stand out from every other codex in the game ? Nothing (I'm not fair, we got an expensive HARDBACK codex, woo !). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperors Immortals Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 You're cynisism would be so much easier if you were'nt so damn correct Vesper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minigun762 Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Since this thread has drifted into a 3.5 codex edition love/hate rant I think its time to put it to sleep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.