Podcast with tester who worked on C:CSM

[Marshal Wilhelm]

G'day,

 

Here is the podcast: HERE.

 

It has a VERY LOUD intro! Beware headset users of any kind!

 

BJ [the tester] starts talking about interesting stuff from 16 minutes. Before that is more like chit-chat, imo.

 

The Chaos stuff starts at 1 hour 19 minutes 35 seconds.

[Iron Warrior w/ Servo Arm]

Interesting, thanks!

[Smurfalypse]

I find it very disturbing that GK were never outside play tested like other codexes. No wonder it had such issues.

[Kol Saresk]

Holy crap, they were talking about a(at minimum) 397 points Noise Marine unit. Could someone double check that for me? Twenty Noise Marines with Nineteen Sonic Blasters? That's frikkin insane. Although with Infiltrate, I could imagine the viability just going through the roof.

[Chimerical]

The guy seems convinced and convincing that the power-level of Chaos (and of codex: Space Marines) will be the standard going forward in 6th.

 

But I'm not convinced. He mentioned that they play tested Necrons under 6th ed. rules, but they let nightscythe spam through. Other things like that are going to happen. GW will remember how well their new model releases like Vendettas and GKs did when their point-costs were stupidly low. It'll be the same as last time round with Eldar, DA, and CSM leading up to 5th.

 

Holy crap, they were talking about a(at minimum) 397 points Noise Marine unit. Could someone double check that for me? Twenty Noise Marines with Nineteen Sonic Blasters? That's frikkin insane. Although with Infiltrate, I could imagine the viability just going through the roof.

 

This is another part where the dude lost some credibility in my eyes, at least as a play-tester. He was talking about 20 NMs with Sonic Blasters + icon of FNP, 20 TSs, and Ahriman like it was a beastly army. How well does this guy really know the game?

[Kol Saresk]

Actually that was the Host I think, the playtester just went with it. Because the person who suggested the über-NM unit kept asking about them and how many attacks and such and the playtester went with it.

 

On the Necrons note, the Nightscythe spam was there before 6th so an independent playtester wouldn't really be able to stop GW from doing whatever they want. Like when they were talking about the Warp Talons, the playtester keep saying how the range of the Blind rule kept changing and that it would have made the best sense at 12 inches IIRC, but GW stuck it at 6. Sort of like they didn't care what the playtesters said. Which actually does seem like GW.

[the jeske]

well at least technicly the range is always bigger then actual 6" its bigger with more models . which wouldnt be bad , if talons could deep strike without scater.

 

 

NM at 20 models with full upgraded squad is 519 pts per unit . without a rhino of course.

 

 

I like how they say that with new dex everything will be ok . True as it may be , they seem to forget that this means 2 years minimum .

[Kol Saresk]

Wow, a full up grade is that expensive. I wonder why my math was so far off...

[Sception]

Even in the wildly unlikely event that future codeces are balanced down to the CSM level, as Jeske mentions, that still leaves us with 2+ years minimum of being outclassed painfully by the likes of Grey Knights and Necrons.

 

And even after every other book has been balanced down in this bold new future, that still won't fix the chaos books considerable internal balance problems.

[Nehekhare]

play something else till then. HH for example.

but seriously, it would have been better to begin balancing where it is indeed needed and just bring out another grey knights codex first. or make them a WD ally template again, invalidating the dex alltogether :)

it is outrageous to learn that the product you bought won't be usable until 2 years - imagine that for a car or a subway ticket...

[Azekai]

it is outrageous to learn that the product you bought won't be usable until 2 years - imagine that for a car or a subway ticket...

Or a multi-hundred dollar army. :down:

 

I listened to about half of this podcast, and while I don't agree with all of the playtester's assertions, I think that such playtesting is essential. All games rules things should be tested prior to release- that is critical to balancing a game.

 

Whoever let Ward unleash the untested GKs on us really done goofed.

[meeper]

Was going to buy a lot of demon engines this weekend until it finally hit me.

 

Why am I financially supporting something that I am dissatisfied with?

 

Seriously people, nerd rage gets us nowhere, consumer rage gets us everywhere. If you dont like it, dont support it. My credit card went back into my wallet.

 

Hopefully the DA codex is decent and it justifies my spending on some new stuff. Even then, I am hesitant to even consider that, I just am getting tired of imperial armies getting the long end of the stick. I may just wait until the Eldar come out if Kelly isnt writing that too.

[Rune Priest Ridcully]

^^^This, because of the "new" codex, I've taken the jump of starting anima, (a fair few guys at my club play it) and painting my infinity, whilst still getting my call to arms stuff starfleet ready, the only money gw is getting from me is for either BFG or the odd eldar bit that I can't get on ebay.

I would seriously like to find out how the blazes this playtester even thought the new codex is even close to any other codex tat is not nearing 5 years old in power options, I'd really like to see how why he thought Thousand sons needed nerfing (the podcast doesn't work for some reason on my computer.)

[Sception]

Despite the dissatisfaction, I don't hate the new book, and I love some of the new models. I'm in the game for beer and pretzels, and as annoying as the problems with the book are, they don't ruin the game for me in that format. As for anima, well, not a fan. Just... nope. Not a fan.

 

I'll probably be returning to my Vamp Counts sooner than expected, though. They're on hiatus while & work on my Black Legion and consider whether or not I want to completely change their paint scheme, and I hadn't expected to be back to them in 2013. While I like the Vamp Count army book, I'm not a big fan of the core rules or setting for that game (complete opposite of my 40k feels), but even so. I mean, It's the vamp book as much as anything that makes me sad at this comparison.

 

 

There were complaints when the counts went from an army book containing five distinct subfactions to an army book that presented a more homogenized version of the faction. Sound familiar? Despite complaints about the that, the new Vamp Book doubled down on the hodgepodge approach, much as our new CSM codex did. Likewise, 8e codeces saw a scaling back of power level from the power creep of latter day 7th edition, and this translated to a nerf for Vamp Counts in the new book.

 

And yet, the Vamp Counts book is awesome. Several exciting new units and options, special rules that are well thought out and actually work, strong internal balance, almost everything serves a purpose in the army, and while they doubled down on their 'no subfactions' hodge podge approach, all of the previous subfactions still got some new units, characters, or options to let players field themed armies if they wanted to do so.

 

Further, 8e army books didn't just balance down, and they didn't aim for the bottom of the tiers at the time. When it came to tackling one of the weaker books, ogre kingdoms, they significantly ramped their power level up. Say what you like about Grey Knights and Necrons, but Imperial Guard, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Dark Eldar were all on more or less the same power level, and that's the level they should have aimed at with 6e codeces.

 

I mean, it hasn't been all roses in fantasy. Tomb Kings have some issues, in particular with poor internal balance and some poorly thought out rules (kind of expected from Cruddace after the 'nid book), and a seemingly poor understanding of just what the 8e rules did to how undead units worked. That's kind of what this chaos book feels like to me - like they haven't quite realized yet just how drastically the 6e rules have changed the scene for assault units & armies. And it likewise has internal balance and poorly thought out rules issues. That's why I say this book feels more like the Cruddace I'm familiar with from Tyranids and Tomb Kings than the Kelly I know from Dark Eldar and Space Wolves.

 

I don't know. the Vamp Counts book learned from the troubles of the Tomb Kings book, and I'm sure later 6e books will learn from the problems with CSMs. Doesn't help CSM players, though.

 

Eh. I'm just rambling, now.

[Circus Nurgling]

^^^This, because of the "new" codex, I've taken the jump of starting anima, (a fair few guys at my club play it) and painting my infinity, whilst still getting my call to arms stuff starfleet ready, the only money gw is getting from me is for either BFG or the odd eldar bit that I can't get on ebay.

I would seriously like to find out how the blazes this playtester even thought the new codex is even close to any other codex tat is not nearing 5 years old in power options, I'd really like to see how why he thought Thousand sons needed nerfing (the podcast doesn't work for some reason on my computer.)

 

It's a good game, with a quick learning curve. I haven't seen many playing it at my lgs lately. I was looking at Hell Dorado, but can't find anyone that plays it at all.

[Rune Priest Ridcully]

In my gaming group, on the gaming night there will be on average, about 2-3 40k/fantasy games going on, 1-3 anime tactics, and 2-3 infinity games, with about one night a month where you can add 1 to all those numbers, and throughout the month expect intro games/the odd games of warmahoardes, call to arms starfleet/BFG/Necromunda/others. Compared to last year, when you could take a way 1 each from the non GW systems and add a good 3-4 to 40k/fantasy, that's telling.

I'm a non competitive/more fluffy gamer myself, and yet even in these sort of games I've just had bad luck/been thrashed with my Thousand sons, and it really does not feel like a new book, and I'm regretting spending the £30 now as I'm feeling that apart from the artwork, it's not really worth it, especially compared to the other codexs, and so I'm trying other systems where you don't ave factions that haven't had updates in the lifetime of some players, or with such bad balance between factions, and where going for a force you like the models and fluff of won't mean you'l struggle to cope with other factions just on the basis of their book's date.

I agree on it feeling more like a Cruddence job then a Kelly, perhaps they changed the names around to try and give the former some slack, or he decided he didn't want to do it/couldn't due to illness and it was handed to Kelly with no time to really work on it.

[Vilicate]

Despite the dissatisfaction, I don't hate the new book, and I love some of the new models. I'm in the game for beer and pretzels, and as annoying as the problems with the book are, they don't ruin the game for me in that format. As for anima, well, not a fan. Just... nope. Not a fan.

 

I'll probably be returning to my Vamp Counts sooner than expected, though. They're on hiatus while & work on my Black Legion and consider whether or not I want to completely change their paint scheme, and I hadn't expected to be back to them in 2013. While I like the Vamp Count army book, I'm not a big fan of the core rules or setting for that game (complete opposite of my 40k feels), but even so. I mean, It's the vamp book as much as anything that makes me sad at this comparison.

 

 

There were complaints when the counts went from an army book containing five distinct subfactions to an army book that presented a more homogenized version of the faction. Sound familiar? Despite complaints about the that, the new Vamp Book doubled down on the hodgepodge approach, much as our new CSM codex did. Likewise, 8e codeces saw a scaling back of power level from the power creep of latter day 7th edition, and this translated to a nerf for Vamp Counts in the new book.

 

And yet, the Vamp Counts book is awesome. Several exciting new units and options, special rules that are well thought out and actually work, strong internal balance, almost everything serves a purpose in the army, and while they doubled down on their 'no subfactions' hodge podge approach, all of the previous subfactions still got some new units, characters, or options to let players field themed armies if they wanted to do so.

 

Further, 8e army books didn't just balance down, and they didn't aim for the bottom of the tiers at the time. When it came to tackling one of the weaker books, ogre kingdoms, they significantly ramped their power level up. Say what you like about Grey Knights and Necrons, but Imperial Guard, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Dark Eldar were all on more or less the same power level, and that's the level they should have aimed at with 6e codeces.

 

I mean, it hasn't been all roses in fantasy. Tomb Kings have some issues, in particular with poor internal balance and some poorly thought out rules (kind of expected from Cruddace after the 'nid book), and a seemingly poor understanding of just what the 8e rules did to how undead units worked. That's kind of what this chaos book feels like to me - like they haven't quite realized yet just how drastically the 6e rules have changed the scene for assault units & armies. And it likewise has internal balance and poorly thought out rules issues. That's why I say this book feels more like the Cruddace I'm familiar with from Tyranids and Tomb Kings than the Kelly I know from Dark Eldar and Space Wolves.

 

I don't know. the Vamp Counts book learned from the troubles of the Tomb Kings book, and I'm sure later 6e books will learn from the problems with CSMs. Doesn't help CSM players, though.

 

Eh. I'm just rambling, now.

 

Think you're pretty much right on the money here - the more I look at and play this book the more I get the Tomb Kings feeling I had when I built that army and took it to a GT (that I was woefully unprepared for). Something I wasn't really thinking about, but you've hit the nail on the head. Luckly for TK, recent FAQ changes have made the army much more viable.

 

We'll see. I still want to make it work, because I actually have attachments to this army.

[Rune Priest Ridcully]

Despite the dissatisfaction, I don't hate the new book, and I love some of the new models. I'm in the game for beer and pretzels, and as annoying as the problems with the book are, they don't ruin the game for me in that format. As for anima, well, not a fan. Just... nope. Not a fan.

 

I'll probably be returning to my Vamp Counts sooner than expected, though. They're on hiatus while & work on my Black Legion and consider whether or not I want to completely change their paint scheme, and I hadn't expected to be back to them in 2013. While I like the Vamp Count army book, I'm not a big fan of the core rules or setting for that game (complete opposite of my 40k feels), but even so. I mean, It's the vamp book as much as anything that makes me sad at this comparison.

 

 

There were complaints when the counts went from an army book containing five distinct subfactions to an army book that presented a more homogenized version of the faction. Sound familiar? Despite complaints about the that, the new Vamp Book doubled down on the hodgepodge approach, much as our new CSM codex did. Likewise, 8e codeces saw a scaling back of power level from the power creep of latter day 7th edition, and this translated to a nerf for Vamp Counts in the new book.

 

And yet, the Vamp Counts book is awesome. Several exciting new units and options, special rules that are well thought out and actually work, strong internal balance, almost everything serves a purpose in the army, and while they doubled down on their 'no subfactions' hodge podge approach, all of the previous subfactions still got some new units, characters, or options to let players field themed armies if they wanted to do so.

 

Further, 8e army books didn't just balance down, and they didn't aim for the bottom of the tiers at the time. When it came to tackling one of the weaker books, ogre kingdoms, they significantly ramped their power level up. Say what you like about Grey Knights and Necrons, but Imperial Guard, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Dark Eldar were all on more or less the same power level, and that's the level they should have aimed at with 6e codeces.

 

I mean, it hasn't been all roses in fantasy. Tomb Kings have some issues, in particular with poor internal balance and some poorly thought out rules (kind of expected from Cruddace after the 'nid book), and a seemingly poor understanding of just what the 8e rules did to how undead units worked. That's kind of what this chaos book feels like to me - like they haven't quite realized yet just how drastically the 6e rules have changed the scene for assault units & armies. And it likewise has internal balance and poorly thought out rules issues. That's why I say this book feels more like the Cruddace I'm familiar with from Tyranids and Tomb Kings than the Kelly I know from Dark Eldar and Space Wolves.

 

I don't know. the Vamp Counts book learned from the troubles of the Tomb Kings book, and I'm sure later 6e books will learn from the problems with CSMs. Doesn't help CSM players, though.

 

Eh. I'm just rambling, now.

 

Think you're pretty much right on the money here - the more I look at and play this book the more I get the Tomb Kings feeling I had when I built that army and took it to a GT (that I was woefully unprepared for). Something I wasn't really thinking about, but you've hit the nail on the head. Luckly for TK, recent FAQ changes have made the army much more viable.

 

We'll see. I still want to make it work, because I actually have attachments to this army.

Same, I'm hoping a FAQ may make the lore and mark of Tzeentch worth it, it would be such a simple fix, but I'm not hopeful...

[Nehekhare]

Ahem...if anyone's looking for a new game out of dissatisfaction with C:CSMeh - try GODSLAYER!

http://www.megalith-games.com/eng_index.php

[Warsmith Aznable]

Ahem...if anyone's looking for a new game out of dissatisfaction with C:CSMeh - try GODSLAYER!

http://www.megalith-games.com/eng_index.php

 

Every other corner of the internet has this sort of recruitment/conversion pressure, do we have to see it on the B&C of all places now, too?

[Kol Saresk]

Ahem...if anyone's looking for a new game out of dissatisfaction with C:CSMeh - try GODSLAYER!

http://www.megalith-games.com/eng_index.php

 

Every other corner of the internet has this sort of recruitment/conversion pressure, do we have to see it on the B&C of all places now, too?

Yes. Since the new Chaos Codex is so lackluster compared to others, everyone must now run away from it with their tails in between their legs.[/sarcasm]

[the jeske]

nah . IMO in the end it doesnt matter for GW . all that vet talk [me included] about dex being meh/wasted potential/wont buy models wont work . because new players dont know it . We can talk about zords , how 3.5 was all we want , but a 14 year old doesnt know and probably never know either of those things . He will buy stuff and then if he is unlucky enough for his friends to play old dex , he may quit . But he alredy bought models , it is the same with us. I dont think I bought any chaos models durning the 5th , other then sonics and 5 blast masters and 3 oblits [no idea why I had 6 in 3.5]. But I bought enough in the past for GW to make good money out of me . Am just not the focus group for GW sales , they are not making the dex for me. They make the dex for a new dude who may not know that SW are more or less identical in game play with slightly more options . Just like mali I do not hate this dex , it is exactly the way I though it would be .

 

And as others said the fact that GW thinks that it is ok for an edition to be slightly balanced in the middle [2 years is almost half and edition] and that then it is fun , shows the new guy focus very good. The dudes that are starting chaos now , wont be there when the game starts getting fun . But that is half of it . telling someone after 5 years of gav dex , that he now only has to wait 2 years more and then it will start being fun [unless the DT switchs , the DT makes a stupid dex that makes foot builds non viable etc] , is imo hardcore .

[Bartali]

The guy seems convinced and convincing that the power-level of Chaos (and of codex: Space Marines) will be the standard going forward in 6th.

 

Unfortunately, never likely to be true. GW tried that previously with CSM and DA (sound familiar ?), and look how that worked out. Also need to factor in that GW likes to push models with poorly thought out rules (Screamers, Flamers).

[Sception]

I could deal with having a weaker book. The things that bother me with the chaos book are all internal: units that don't have the tools to perform their jobs, units designed for jobs that don't exist anymore in 6e, special rules & equipment that just. doesn't. work. Units and options that aren't evocative of thier fluff. Units that are completely outmatched by no brainer choices in their same force org slot, to the extent that there's no point using them.

 

Even if they do balance the other books down to our general level, it still won't fix the internal problems with our codex. And it's the internal problems that are getting in the way of my fun.

[Brother Nihm]

Word.