Podcast with tester who worked on C:CSM

[Prot]

I haven't listened to the pod cast yet (I'm at work).... but some of you mentioned the playtesting.

 

The playtesting is the giant elephant in the room as far as I'm concerned. There are a lot of players that get their hands on a new book, and in hours you can see some very abusive, UNINTENTIONAL ideas hitting the internet. Damage control is limited by their lack of playtesting. At best they release a FAQ that limits abuse.

 

This is a massive issue for me. For the most part it 'appears' that GW playtest internally with the -spirit- of 40k in mind, but outside those doors, most (not all) people are looking for the most deviant list they can manufacture.

 

Going back a few years I live in an area where we had trusted playtesters of most of the new codexes. I distinctly remember that with the last Chaos codex my friends would tell me that they suggested to GW that the codex was below par. It was uncompetitive, and had issues.

 

GW's response was to keep their opinions to themselves. Apparently on the playtest list official playtesters wanted to stop participating if GW wouldn't fix some things. The response to the last Chaos 'dex was that negative. GW told the playtest group that their "function" was to test rules, and verify rules, and mechanics of rules, but otherwise their opinions were unwanted.

 

In the end I believe that was the last time my local friends got to play test pre-released codexes. To my knowledge (I could be wrong) that's the moment GW stopped using 'real' hardcore players for playtesting. IMO since then it's been this roller coaster ride of lethargic, and abusive lists.

 

They gotta get out of this magic bubble they operate in. Sure you get the 14 year old's mom dropping 200 bucks on a couple of units, but as soon as the next Halo comes out, that kid is gone from the hobby... potentially for good. I think it's VERY short term thinking.

 

Sorry for the run-on rant. This is the #1 issue for me right now with GW's bubble playtesting policy. I think it's easier for them to operate and more importantly control things, but inevitably it hurts the long term viability.

[Kol Saresk]

@Malisteen: A lot of people are saying that this Codex is balanced(I'm talking other than the playtester) but you are saying that it's not. Could perhaps show where these imbalances are? I'm just asking a serious honest question because right now to me as someone who is not exactly but not exactly experienced, the only thing I have to go off of is the 4th ed, which sort of makes this edition look like the holy grail.

[Wolf Lord Fenrir]

They gotta get out of this magic bubble they operate in. Sure you get the 14 year old's mom dropping 200 bucks on a couple of units, but as soon as the next Halo comes out, that kid is gone from the hobby... potentially for good. I think it's VERY short term thinking.

 

Sorry for the run-on rant. This is the #1 issue for me right now with GW's bubble playtesting policy. I think it's easier for them to operate and more importantly control things, but inevitably it hurts the long term viability.

 

People have been banging on about GW's short term thinking for years now (myself included for a while), but they are still here and seemingly stronger than ever. 40K jumped the roboshark years ago with the wolf cavalry and now with dragons in the game.

[Agerjag]

Personally I really like the new codex. Alot has changed and some units I really wanted to be viable still were not (thousand sons). I have had no problem being competitive with GK and SW. The new bikes are pretty great. Ive enjoyed playing with the hellturkey and forgefiend(usually 2). Yes, I agree that the internal balance is off, there are obvious overpriced units. This is really true for most codexes though, I would say personally this codex has allowed me to play more varied lists then ANY other codex I have ever played. I find every time im building lists I never have enough points to take all the things I want. Bikes, terminators, normal CSM, plagues(as troops), havoks, turkey, fiends, vindicator, obliterators, raptors are all viable in nearly every list type. We also have more specialized units that become playable depending on focusing your list towards a certain playstyle. Our HQs are pretty solid and lords of every flavor have viability, sorcerers are pretty top notch casters as well(yes i still wish we could have divination). Its really pointless to say that the exact units that I want to play are not the best options for winning. We have some very solid lists and have been placing in tournaments even amongst the grey knight, SW and necron spam. There are alot of armies available and we have at least someone in top 10 in most tournaments and we certainly dont have the largest following. You just need to adapt and outplay your opponents same as it always was. Im glad we dont have the ludicrous rules that was 3.5 and Ive played with that codex.

 

There will always be things that are not viable, sometimes its due to error or just being bad. This is true of items in most codexs (why take x when y is clearly better). The key is an example of something that does not really work well enough with its current rules, but would be too good for its points if it was always active. But things like that are everywhere.

 

For the record ive been playing since 3rd edition and my main armies are DA, CSM, and TAU.

 

I dont think that anyone can point at a codex and say that it is internally balanced. There is no way you can say that every option has just as much merit as any other in the codex. It just doesnt happen. Luckily enough we have enough options to still give a nice amount of variability while remaining competitive.

[the jeske]

@Malisteen: A lot of people are saying that this Codex is balanced(I'm talking other than the playtester) but you are saying that it's not. Could perhaps show where these imbalances are? I'm just asking a serious honest question because right now to me as someone who is not exactly but not exactly experienced, the only thing I have to go off of is the 4th ed, which sort of makes this edition look like the holy grail.

mali will probably do this too , but let me take a swing at it .

 

better then gav dex[duh not hard to do] . we actualy have a FA section . we actualy have an elite section .

 

what is bad/unbalanced with the new dex. why make spawns better if your puting them in FA slots with bikers and a new flyer ? now I said It countless times before , it only makes sense if 2k points is the normal size game and you have 2 FoC to play with . else it doesnt make any sense.

 

But there is worse stuff. hth oblits . now if they were realy ultra cheap [like 90pts unmarked for 3] or terminators cost a lot .the unit would make sense . but no such thing happens. they make a unit , with new models[well new arms] and make it worse every way then an old one ? in an edition where melee is worse then shoting , why do that ? I mean even if the unit had uber cool models people would be using them for conversion/counts as , but we are talking about oblit look a likes here . they are butt ugly.

 

then there is the forge fiend/mauler fiend dual kit . Those babies should be THE sellers for a new dex. I mean realy everyone should want 2. but what do we actualy get . ok models [am not going to go in to esthetics .imo GW droped the ball on how their painted their own] , but the rules ? an anti tank uber rifleman would have been awesome . if it came out in 5th ed . the mauler is hth , so already problematic and again if we take it we are runing in to a problem of it taking up a hvy slot . take 2 and we have no anti tank . again this means playing chaos under 2k points is a lot less fun and I mean realy people. Try the dex at 2k points , it feels like a different codex.

 

rest stuff is cosmetic . 1ksons suck , but they always suck . NM are , well bad is probably the wrong name for it , but they werent handled well in the new dex.

tzeench stuff in general sucks , but again tzeench stuff sucked hard in general .

 

on its own the codex is as balanced as the last one and let us hope that all that come after this one will be the same .till then we have to deal with the fact that we are playing a codex that is suppose to be played against only 6th ed dex .

[Prot]

They gotta get out of this magic bubble they operate in. Sure you get the 14 year old's mom dropping 200 bucks on a couple of units, but as soon as the next Halo comes out, that kid is gone from the hobby... potentially for good. I think it's VERY short term thinking.

 

Sorry for the run-on rant. This is the #1 issue for me right now with GW's bubble playtesting policy. I think it's easier for them to operate and more importantly control things, but inevitably it hurts the long term viability.

 

People have been banging on about GW's short term thinking for years now (myself included for a while), but they are still here and seemingly stronger than ever. 40K jumped the roboshark years ago with the wolf cavalry and now with dragons in the game.

 

But why are they still here? I am betting (just a hunch) that their I.P. is going to be what they hang their hat on over the next decade: Books, movies, video games, spin offs, etc.

 

I know a lot of people who simply play the game, or even stay involved on any level simply because of the 40K background. It's got a lot of depth and has a lot of good marketing potential. Now they have some decent writers, and who knows where the Heresy could end up as far as entertainment is concerned?

 

But the game itself? I wouldn't say it's doing that great. I have a store with one employee that can't crank a deuce out without closing the store..... They're cutting corners to make the bottom line look good.

 

We'll see what happens... it's a bit of a different conversation from the original post. ;)

[Sception]

@Malisteen: A lot of people are saying that this Codex is balanced(I'm talking other than the playtester) but you are saying that it's not. Could perhaps show where these imbalances are? I'm just asking a serious honest question because right now to me as someone who is not exactly but not exactly experienced, the only thing I have to go off of is the 4th ed, which sort of makes this edition look like the holy grail.

 

Warp talons are overpriced & their special rule doesn't work. Berzerkers and Possessed are melee units with no real way to get to melee. Possessed & talons are expensive, melee only marine armored elites without grenades, meaning they crumple in the face of cover. Raptors would be ok, but they're completely overshadowed by the cheap bikes. The Dark Apostle is just a worse chaos lord with fewer options. MoT is terrible on any unit that doesn't already have a ward save. Warpsmith just isn't particularly good, and doesn't have access to most of the chaos marine gear list despite being the guy who maintains the stuff. There seems to be almost no thought behind the price points of options on various units: Vets costs two points on raptors, but only one point on bikes? Meltaguns are strictly better than plasma pistols on raptors, yet the plasma pistols cost 5 points more? The murder sword is supposed to be 20 points better than a power sword? Or even be good at all? Lords who become daemon princes drop all their gear, even those pieces of gear that princes can take, and the positioning rules are such that half the time you won't be able to place the new model, anyway?

 

The book feels like its working against you, not with you. Like, if something's good, it's in spite of the rules, or the result of the designers overlooking something, not on purpose. Everything that could be awesome has to have some mitigating factor to stop you from just being excited to field it. Half the units were brought in from the old book with no thought put into fixing or even recognizing what was wrong with them before (ie, thousand sons), or no thought put into how the 6e rules have changed the game and rendered their previous battlefield role obsolete or non-functional (berzerkers). There's little thought or creativity put into most of the new units (whoop, chaos chaplains. whoop, chaos tech marines. whoop obliterators with melee weapons).

 

Can you fenangle something playable out of it? Sure, probably. And the games random enough that even if they're weaker overall, you should do alright against regular opponents. But the book very much feels like its working against you, not with you.

 

The comparison I keep coming back to is the 8th ed undead books in fantasy. The chaos book feels like the Tomb Kings book - half hearted, focus on a couple big new monsters with not much thought put into the rest of the units, units with weaknesses where their strengths should be, special rules that just don't work, a seeming lack of understanding of what exactly the new edition did to how undead units function. Haphazard testing with poor internal balance, and a faction that wasn't strong before getting a new book that still leaves them feeling lackluster and uninspired next to their contemporaries. Mostly, like the CSM book, the Tomb Kings army book just feels like its working against you. Like it doesn't want to play. Like every time you're almost excited about an army idea, the book just shuts you down and is like "nope". You crack the book open, and this aura of apathy and disenchantment pours out of it, and you've got to drag army lists out of it kicking and screaming the whole time, like you're trying to drag some big, ungainly dog to the tub for a bath.

 

For a contrast, look at the vamp counts book. Despite nerfing the factions most powerful combos with nothing as effective in their place, the book is still full of exciting and creative new units and options, and the balance is still in line with other books. More importantly, it understood how the 8th ed rules had changed undead (perhaps taking lessons from the problems with Tomb Kings), and through careful consideration put out a book where basically every unit has something unique and exciting it can do for you, it's own role on the battlefield. Everything is awesome in its own way, and the mitigating factor for taking one awesome thing is that you didn't spend those points on something else that was also awesome, but in a different way. Not awesome as in overpowered, mind, but awesome as in fun and cool and knowing what its supposed to do, having a job to be good at and being good at it. And despite stubbornly sticking to their hodge podge, no-sublists approach, each of the old sublist got exciting new options to play with for themed lists, so Strigoi and Lahmians and even vampless Necromancer players knew they hadn't been forgotten. The vamp counts book feels like it's working with you, like when you sit down to write a list, it's ready and waiting, excited to go for a spin, a happy dog that just saw you reach for the leash.

 

The vamp counts book did it right. You really got the feeling that the author cared, that they were both a competent games designer, capable of writing rules that worked without being unbalanced, and a fan of the faction, like they were excited to have the privilege of working on this book, and eager to bring fellow vamp counts fans something they could really sink their teeth into, no pun intended. The fluff may not have been the most inspiring, and the cover art was laughably bad, but the rules? The 8th ed Vamp Counts book is the freaking gold standard for taking a difficult, gimmicky faction and forging it into a diverse, exciting army with excellent balance, both external and internal. Man, who wrote that hotness, let me check...

 

Oh, what do you know, Phil Kelly. No wonder I was so excited to hear he was writing our new codex! What happened to you, Mr. Kelly? Did you get too sick to study for the exam, and then have to copy off of Cruddace's test? Or are you not so good at rules writing when you don't have a handful of examples of other books already written for a given edition, with all of the feedback from fans to point out to you in detail what those other books did right or did wrong? Or do you just find chaos marines to be less interesting than vamp counts or dark eldar or space wolves, so you couldn't really get into the project? Or did you want to do something more ambitious, and some corporate suit told you 'no' and took the wind out of your sails? Because, seriously, this is not your best work here.

 

Regardless of what happened, Kelly, I am disappoint. Go room, and think about what did.

[Rune Priest Ridcully]

^^^^^That, before I'd say he was by far the best writer/developer they had, now? He sitll is, but only really his fluff and previous work is keeping him up, I would swear this was a Cruddence boo if it wasn't for the name on it...

[Kol Saresk]

So what exactly does this mean as far as viability? According to the battle reports I'm seeing, it's not a powerhouse but it is doing better than the last dex and there have been a few different lists running around too. So is the unbalance really working against it? Or is the viability in spite of the imbalance?

[Sception]

The one thing I do have to say, is that I generally find discussion on the TK forums to generally be a bit more interesting than discussion on the vamp counts forums. TK forums have QQing and wailing and gnashing of teeth, they have discussions and debates, they have arguments over whether 'counts as-ing' as another faction is a betrayal, they have people putting tons of thought into how to make something work, they've got posters cheering each other on as they go to do battle with their own codex, they have like parties with cake* and everything whenever an FAQ comes out with some little thing in their favor.

 

Vamp counts? They've like a bunch of happy pot heads baking in a room, with threads like "man... you know... you know what's good? Everything, man...." I'm exaggerating, here, the balance in 8e is pretty good, and there's debates and discussions of how to, say, deal with those rowdy ogre players, but overall they just don't have the drama that the Tomb Kings players get. Although they do have more and better painted models on display. I guess it comes from all but the must belligerent Tomb Kings players being driven away, while Vamp counts just attracts more people, and has tons of happy players who, with nothing to argue about, just spend their time converting and painting away.

 

*cake may have been a lie

 

 

So what exactly does this mean as far as viability? According to the battle reports I'm seeing, it's not a powerhouse but it is doing better than the last dex and there have been a few different lists running around too. So is the unbalance really working against it? Or is the viability in spite of the imbalance?

 

What, tournament viability? I don't know, better than before (maybe, lash was a big deal, and the old daemon weapons were pretty badass for the three weeks they had AP2 before the new book was released and just got rid of them), but still a noticeable tier below Blood Angels/Space Wolves/Imperial Guard, let alone Grey Knights or Necrons. Some functional options for at least one or two reasonable builds.

[Brother Ambroz]

They've like a bunch of happy pot heads baking in a room, with threads like "man... you know... you know what's good? Everything, man...."

 

Sounds a bit familiar.....seems like we have one of those around here too...

[Sception]

Yeah, but around here that kind of talk sparks a "lively debate".

[Vilicate]

Yeah, but around here that kind of talk sparks a "lively debate".

 

That's because we don't have just one "Sleboda" to contantly nay-say our book. We have lots. ;-)

 

 

Overall, I think you make some good points malisteen. Chaos has got some flaws - no joke. Do I think they're exaggerated and pronounced as some poeple? No. Do I think there's overreaction about how "crappy" some units are? Definitely. One thing I enjoy about this forum is that we are all very passionate about this book - we all want/wanted it to work, and loads of people are trying tons of different builds to try and make this into some that works now. Or for now :-D

[Brother Ambroz]

I wasn't talking about our book when I said that.

 

Honestly it doesn't seem like these guys were talking from a competitive standpoint. I don't usually either (except on these boards) but I got bored about 5 minutes into these guys discussing C:CSM and turned it off.

[Azekai]

I wasn't talking about our book when I said that.

 

Honestly it doesn't seem like these guys were talking from a competitive standpoint. I don't usually either (except on these boards) but I got bored about 5 minutes into these guys discussing C:CSM and turned it off.

Well, to be fair, he does address the current tourney scene later on, but he doesn't seem particularly in touch with what is effective (see earlier comments about the Uber Noise Marine unit).

 

That's because we don't have just one "Sleboda" to contantly nay-say our book. We have lots.

As well we should; I don't know how I am supposed to fight the Long War without the proper equipment to do so.

[Vilicate]

That's because we don't have just one "Sleboda" to contantly nay-say our book. We have lots.

As well we should; I don't know how I am supposed to fight the Long War without the proper equipment to do so.

 

Not complaining about it, just saying it's here. I mean, I wish that people whined about it a little less and were a little more constructive, but it's the internet and that's to be expected.

 

Better to discuss what we can do with a bad apple than to constantly discuss how apple got to be bad in the first place. We're not getting a new apple.

[Azekai]

Better to discuss what we can do with a bad apple than to constantly discuss how apple got to be bad in the first place. We're not getting a new apple.

I grin and bear it in real life- I have little desire to do so when I engage in my expensive hobby.

[the jeske]

I mean, I wish that people whined about it a little less and were a little more constructive, but it's the internet and that's to be expected.

constructive about what . Do you need anyones help to be pointed out that bikes are good and that you needed them , because A our hqs are on bikes B havocks or not av13+ still happens and melta has to be somewhere and it cant be on the csm ? how many posts about stuff like that can be writen ? one durning the review after that you just look at the codex and ask yourself why play csm , when SW can do an identical list that works better.

[tvih]

Mostly, like the CSM book, the Tomb Kings army book just feels like its working against you. Like it doesn't want to play. Like every time you're almost excited about an army idea, the book just shuts you down and is like "nope". You crack the book open, and this aura of apathy and disenchantment pours out of it, and you've got to drag army lists out of it kicking and screaming the whole time, like you're trying to drag some big, ungainly dog to the tub for a bath.

Well, I must admit I've been getting this feeling lately with trying to come up with the best way to field a Khorne Lord on a Juggernaut. It's what I really want to do, but it's problematic at best. Now, I want to field him in a way that allows him to move fast, as footslogging sucks because it gets you killed, Rhinos suck (for assaulting purposes, anyway), and Land Raiders are just too damn expensive for what they do. So it leaves the Juggernaut or a Bike, and I'd like Juggernaut for the extra wound, extra attack and extra coolness. A Nurgle Lord would work better on a bike as T6 makes 'em quite nutty, but I don't want to play Nurgle - everyone else already does. But anyway here the codex - with some help from the BRB - slaps you in the face.

 

For one, there's no cavalry unit to accompany the Lord. Why not give us Skullcrushers, Fantasy style? Because pairing him with bikes appears to not be such a great choice, given bikes get a cover save which allows enemies to focus fire the Lord who doesn't get a similar cover save. And it seems that as illogical as it is, most people will say - and I grudgingly have to accept that RAW kinda supports it - that you can't run and turbo-boost with a mixed unit, so you're limited to moving only 12", negating some of that much-needed mobility in the first turn or two of the match. This only leaves one with Chaos Spawns really, who are somewhat decent meat shields I suppose with their T5 and 3 wounds, though the lack of armor saves sucks. And I really don't like the models - which are expensive to boot. I suppose I might try proxying the Possessed I'm getting in the Battleforce - and have no real use for - I ordered as Spawns by swapping to a 40mm base, but it still just leaves a bad taste overall.

 

In any case I already ordered the Khorne Lord on Juggernaut finecast model at a high cost, so now there's that but little to no good way to actually field him as such. Sigh. Should've cancelled the order when I first started realizing the potential problems. I mean I do love the model and as such it won't go to a complete waste even if I can't field him on the gaming table effectively as he makes for a fine display piece, but still as an expensive purchase it could've waited until I had "enough" gaming models.

 

EDIT: In my desperation had a look at the Chaos Daemons codex. Hilarious that the Juggernaut models in it are still considered infantry!? Sheesh, so that's them off the list of possibilities right away. A HQ with a Juggernaut plus some Flesh hounds or Bloodcrushers would've been a remote possibility to consider (again though, costly models), but bleh... given the costs involved it seems like a bust, plus if I take allies on my C:CSM, I think I'd rather take my upstart Orks than buy into yet another codex, even in a small quantity.

¨

EDIT 2: Well according to another thread the CD escort for C:CSM Lord apparently wouldn't be possible anyway, pfft.

[Warsmith Aznable]

The short of it seems to be that we're not much better off competitively than the last codex, but we at least have several different ways to be mediocre this time. It was a game effort on the codex writer's part, definitely better to have than the 4th version, but just a bit of a tease to give us new units with cool models that end up being mostly underwhelming. The Heldrake is all that really stands out to me out of the new things as being very good, though it is nice to be able to take Marks that don't get shot out from under us anymore. I love the idea of all of the other new units, they just don't quite get to where they say they are going.

 

The Dark Angels rumors have me a bit upset. If they turn out to be true then CSM will be preceded and succeeded by vastly superior PA codices.

[Vilicate]

Better to discuss what we can do with a bad apple than to constantly discuss how apple got to be bad in the first place. We're not getting a new apple.

I grin and bear it in real life- I have little desire to do so when I engage in my expensive hobby.

 

So then you're going to go on an internet forum and complain about it? If interested in your hobby for fun's sake, then why not do something that you have fun doing, rather than endlessly complaining about how something that's broken won't get fixed?

 

I enjoy challenges, so I'm going to keep playing Chaos.

 

And the jeske, I've decided it's just better to avoid responding to your posts. You're very opinionated (hey, me too!), to the point of belligerency. You have your view of how things work, I've got mine. Probably not going to change each others minds.

[Brother Ambroz]

@whythre - Yeah GW either gets lackluster testers or just doesn't listen to the decent ones.

 

@Vilicate - Everyone's entitled to their opinions. If you don't like what some people say, just ignore it. I don't mind the dex. Sure there are many many things that could've been done differently but I'll take this over the last. Although if the DA rumors have any bits of truth to them then I'll be done with the gaming aspect of 40k for a long time.

[Vilicate]

@Vilicate - Everyone's entitled to their opinions. If you don't like what some people say, just ignore it. I don't mind the dex. Sure there are many many things that could've been done differently but I'll take this over the last. Although if the DA rumors have any bits of truth to them then I'll be done with the gaming aspect of 40k for a long time.

 

Can't fault you for that - I remember how excited I was when the last chaos book came out. Lots of nice new models, but the codex was lackluster. I was okay with that, until the new space marine book dropped. That was freaking maddening. They got special characters that changed the way the army plays? Bogus. At least we have that with this book to a greater or lesser degree.

 

It just chaps me a little bit when people are just constantly negative about everything this book has - it's a vast improvement over the previous version. Also, it discourages new people from wanting to play the army that they like when they read about how much something (allegedly) sucks.

[Kol Saresk]

So what exactly does this mean as far as viability? According to the battle reports I'm seeing, it's not a powerhouse but it is doing better than the last dex and there have been a few different lists running around too. So is the unbalance really working against it? Or is the viability in spite of the imbalance?

 

What, tournament viability? I don't know, better than before (maybe, lash was a big deal, and the old daemon weapons were pretty badass for the three weeks they had AP2 before the new book was released and just got rid of them), but still a noticeable tier below Blood Angels/Space Wolves/Imperial Guard, let alone Grey Knights or Necrons. Some functional options for at least one or two reasonable builds.

So if say, for instance, if someone took one of the "mediocre"(aka not one of Jeske's lists) and say went up against a BA/SW/IG/GK/Necrons and walked outside and one, would you say that it was a fluke? I ask because I have seen one or two battle reports were the Chaos list has come out on top of a SW army. I think there's one or two on here and one of them was with a KSons army. Although both armies were only 500 points and I think I heard somewhere that the SW are the Space Marine Horde Army, or something like that. I mean, if even what could be argued(actually I'm pretty sure there's no argument that the KSons got the short end of the stick) the worst list could beat out a list that is a tier above, then could it be that maybe the Codex is actually more viable than the math hammer suggests?

 

I'm not trying to make the discussion swing one way or the other. It's just that I see people saying one thing and then other people doing something else. Sort of like say, a KSons army went up against a Necron Scythe-spam and the KSons lost, but still came out killing everything but one scythe while the KSons were completely wiped out.

[Minsc]

The short of it seems to be that we're not much better off competitively than the last codex, but we at least have several different ways to be mediocre this time

 

This sums it up pretty well.

Honestly. the new Chaos Codex is great...as long as you don't try to win. :)

 

I was excited when I heard that Phil Kelly would be the author of our codex, he was my favourite writer (I like all his 40k creations: Eldar, Dark Eldar, Orks and even Space Wolves, the latter is somewhat overpowered, but still a very solid codex in it's own right.)

Oh well, the guy has already made a boo-boo in Fantasy (looking at you Beastmen armybook!), so it was only a matter of time before his first boo-boo in 40k came as well.

 

I ask because I have seen one or two battle reports were the Chaos list has come out on top of a SW army.

 

CSM is actually pretty decent against SW thanks to VotLW.

That's also one of the issues with the new codex - a codex shouldn't be mediocre against some armies, but then turned up to eleven (I'm exaggerating) against others.