Podcast with tester who worked on C:CSM

[Brother Ambroz]

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.

 

 

Tell that to GKs before daemons got their update. :P

[Sception]

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'ma respond with a quote from one of my earlier posts:

 

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.

 

I cannot emphasize this enough, and it seems to be missing a lot of people.

 

THE EXTERNAL BALANCE DOESN'T BOTHER ME.

 

Are we a bit below the power level of most other books? Yeah, but we're still well within the scope of the randomness of the game, and if you stick to the better options in the book you should be ok. Of course, the same could be said for the Tomb Kings book.

 

The problems that bother me most about this book are all internal problems, and have nothing to do with the book's win/loss percentage against grey knights. In my local community I never had much trouble winning with the 4e chaos marine codex. It wasn't losses that caused me to give up on my army. In fantasy, I won far more regularly with my Vamp Counts under the 7th ed book than the 8th ed book (and this is even after the release of 8th edition), and yet I love and cherish the 8th ed book as a gift from Nagash, while the 7th ed book was a boring-as-hell book with one obvious build that mostly just played itself and it got really grumpy and belligerent if you tried to do anything else with it.

 

So no, how 'competitive' the best lists of a given book are has very little to do with how much I enjoy it or how good I consider the codex to be overall or how much I QQ about it on the interweb. The questions aren't "how much can I win" but rather: does the book have its own character? Does it do its own thing? Does each unit have its own unique niche on the table, and are they all good in their niche? Is the book full of options that are dying to be played? Do all of the units and options and special rules do what they're supposed to do? Can you build a range of viable lists with it? If you choose to take a unit, is it because the unit's just that awesome, or fit your theme? If you didn't take a unit, was it because it didn't fit your theme, or because you had already filled up your army with other things that you were even more excited to field?

 

Or are there a bunch of units, options, and special rules that don't work? Are there units that are bad at their job, or don't seem to even know what their job is? Does the book have several 'obvious' choices - whether things you should always field or never field? Does the book step on another book's toes, or feel like an inferior rehash of another book? If you don't take a unit, is it because the unit itself just seems dull or lackluster or is simply overshadowed by some other unit that does the same thing better? If you did take a unit, is it because you felt you had to, or because it was just the blatantly superior version of some other unit you would have preferred to field?

 

 

While the new chaos book may not be as far on the negative side of these questions as the 4e book, it still hasn't found its way into the positive end of things, overall.

 

 

-------------------

 

ALSO: Homestuck hasn't updated in several days, and it will be at least three more days wait, and as such I'm going through some acute withdrawal pains that dramatically exaggerate any existing feelings of bitterness I might otherwise be experiencing, significantly increasing the quantity and density of my QQing until I get my fix. I've been taking regular doses of other webcomics to mitigate the symptoms, but the generic webcomics just don't have the efficacy of the name brand, despite what the FDA may claim.

 

It doesn't help that there haven't been any new episodes of Adventure Time, Gravity Falls, or My Little Pony in the last couple weeks, either.

 

Over the course of the coming week, though, I should have new ponies, adventure times, and homestucks, and I imagine that while the CSM book won't look good at that point, its badness at least won't seem like such a glob-forsaken travesty.

[Rain]

My Little Pony

 

And to think that I used to respect you.

 

Seriously though, what he said. Except for the pony thing. Exactly what he said.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

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.

 

I think this will be a good test. If what BJ [from the interview] said is true, the new DA will be like CSM in terms of powa!

If the new DA are as good as SW, then his views become a little harder to believe.

 

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.

 

At the risk of sounding elitist, which isn't my intent :tu:, 40K isn't 40K at 500 pts. Just like it isn't really 40K at 3000 pts. Things are vastly different, as for example, Tau become more powerful as the points go down [assuming the board remains at 6x4'] as they have so much room to jump around in. In short, low models-per-square-foot makes shooty armies great, and high m-p-s-f makes horde armies better. Etc.

 

You'd really want to see C:CSM winning half-ish of their games against C:SW in games of 1.5-2K over at least six months, and you want SW players to have some gripe about whatever CSM units are OP, or even better, whatever synergy effects and lists are OP, just like people playing against SW say "those Long Fangs" or "those Grey Hunters" or "those Rune Priests" or "those Thunder Lords" to get people thinking that C:CSM is decent. Remember, SW should actually have lost a little zing as they are an edition behind [not being on the cusp like Newcrons were] and so CSM should certainly not be consistently being hammered by tournament level SW lists.

 

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.

 

The Dex should really be between DE and SW, imo. I feel that DE are a little weaker than SW, but because they can be tuned for anti-MEq, they hold up well enough. But all he had to do was play against his own creations, or think "hrmmm, why are my spiky Marines struggling to beat that Tau list, when my hairy Marines did is pretty handily....?"

 

The reality is, GW just isn't a properly professional company, even though they charge like one. *shrugs*

 

My Little Pony

 

And to think that I used to respect you.

 

Seriously though, what he said. Except for the pony thing. Exactly what he said.

http://bwilliams101.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/resistance-is-futile.png

[Kol Saresk]

@Mali: Thanks for answering all of my questions.

 

 

@Marshal Wilhelm: Kill-Team is still 40K :tu:

[the jeske]

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

And again I get mind blown or am missing something in transltion. I mean saying what you just said , is like saying someone is good at being second . there is no good and second , just like there is no good and not wining.

 

 

 

 

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

where those proper 6th ed builds ?

[Kol Saresk]

And what exactly is a "proper" build?

 

By proper, do you mean a list that works in 6th Edition or do you mean a list that the theoryhammer says is the most viable list ever made with the Codex?

 

If it's the first one, I'd say yeah. The second one, probably not. I don't know nor particular care what theory says since theory is what should happen based on general assumption, not always what will.

[Sception]

@Mali: Thanks for answering all of my questions.

 

No prob! Not everyone may agree with my complaints, but they're not coming out of nowhere. In particular, if your only concerns with a book is 'can I be competitive in beer & pretzels games?' or even 'can I build a list that will do alright at the local tournament?' then no, the situation isn't as bad as I may make it seem. However, if you're like me, then you typically spend way more time with just yourself and your book than you do at the gaming table, needling around with lists you may never play. With a Great book (I keep banging on about the Vamp counts book, but it's really that awesome, while simultaneously being balanced with other codeces and not dominating the game at all, and since I kind of dropped 40k for much of 5th edition when I got tired of the 4th ed codex, I just don't familiar enough with 40k books to pull an example from them), you end up with dozens of lists that you're super excited to play, and that, win or lose, feel great when you finally get them to the table, and not just for the first month you've got the book, but for the first year, the second, and onward.

 

The CSM book, half the lists I start just sort of shrivel up on me, ya know?

 

 

My Little Pony

 

And to think that I used to respect you.

 

I certainly understand the sentiment. I'm not really into the /b/rony subculture. The fandom does put out some good stuff, but I find much of it to be very off-putting. I'm not at all a fan of the 4chan community in general, though it does seem I share their taste in cartoons.

 

That said, the show itself is colorful and innovative, employs or has employed many creative types that I respect, and its unrelentingly sincere and saccharine disposition* is a powerful remedy to my inherent bitterness. Overall, it's no Adventure Time (though I admit some trepidation for the future of Adventure Time with Rebecca Sugar leaving), but what can I say, I like it, and I'm more cheerful if I've seen a new episode recently. Well usually ... their debasement of the historical conflict between native peoples & white invaders was ... well, enough about 'Over a Barrel', I'm bitter enough as it is, and we've already got one pony-themed reaction image in the thread, no need to go out of my way provoking more.

 

* What's this? An upbeat, cheerful show that doesn't feel the need to try and play its positive attitude off as an ironic joke in an attempt to worm its way onto the 'cool kids' table? This is one of my big problems with brony culture, apart from the usual internet fandom overhype. So much of it seems to come out of an attitude of sarcasm and cynicism (grimdark, r34, 'molestia', just everything to come out of 4chan), when it's the absence of such cynicism that I find so refreshing in the show itself.

 

.

 

.

 

.

 

 

Wilhelm: /)(^3^)(\

[Minsc]

I'm not sure why my reply to Jeske was removed, it was 100% comedy, and I'm pretty sure he would've been able to understand and take it.

[Brother Nihm]

I'm not sure why my reply to Jeske was removed, it was 100% comedy, and I'm pretty sure he would've been able to understand and take it.

That was me. And this is why:

it also includes pointless, off-topic or smart-alec posts anywhere on the board. Remember the B&C is here to promote constructive discussion of the 40K hobby and anything not contributing to this may be considered spam and deleted. Repeat offenders may also be Warned for such behaviour.

 

Though at this stage the topic is singing on the last verse.

I'll give it a few more posts to get back on track.

[Sception]

Is there much else to be said about the original topic? The interview was interesting enough, and I appreciate Wilhelm pointing it out, but mostly just seemed to reinforce the existing impression many of us had that GW playtesters aren't really stress testing the rules in any meaningful way. Unless someone thinks Huron lists sporting 500 point noise marine units are set to make a big impact on the meta, I don't think there's anything in it that will change the way we think about or play with the book. The main thing that stuck with me about the interview was that it seemed the highest praise the tester had for it was 'finally, an end to codex creep', by which he seemed to mean 'hurray, a weak book', and that's not a very encouraging attitude. An overly conservative chaos book does nothing to fix the excesses of necrons or grey knights, nor does external balance excuse the books internal problems.

 

I do admit to having skipped to the hour/19 mark per Wilhelm's original comment. I'll try and go back to listen to the first hour to see if I have anything in particular to say about it, assuming the thread's still open this afternoon.

[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.

 

But why are they still here?

 

Simply put? People are idiots eand easily parted with their money.

 

I agree that the IP is where they are going to start raking the cash in. The game itself has always been a second to the sales. Maybe not always, but certainly since 2nd edition.

[Sception]

I'm still here because I love chaos marines - their story, personality, and character - and because I love the 40k minis, and the setting, more than any other minis game I've tried. I love the 'heroic scale', I love how beefy and baroque everything is. The dark vengeance chaos models are some of my favorite minis of all time. That said, the 4e book was enough that I eventually did get out of the game, and sell or give away most of my models. Had I not found a box of chaos marines I had missed at around the same time that I started hearing rumors of the new book's immanent release, I might not be here right now.

[MagicMan]

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.

 

 

Lol, so is everyone.

[Brother Nihm]

Except IG and SW.

[Vilicate]

The GK rules are basically cheating, and Necrons are only really frustrating to play against if they bring the flyers. Having easy access to cheap flyers as a troop transport is what makes them silly. Also, wraiths and mindshackle scarabs. But other than that stuff, they're not so bad.

 

I'm pretty glad that I didn't get rules like that in this book. I'd rather have rules that were underpowered than overpowered.

[Sception]

Lol, so is everyone.

 

The point is, when a couple recent books were overpowered, balancing everyone else down only makes the situation worse.

[Kol Saresk]

The only way that should work is if the overpowered books are the first ones to be balanced down. Also I'm willing to bet that whatever book is "balanced down" last will wind up being the most overpowered.

[Sception]

I see two likely results:

 

1) the simplified, powered down chaos book was a fluke, and ward brings the dark angels book looking exactly like one might have expected. The status quo moves forward as though the chaos book never happened. This is the future that I hope happens, given that I know others gettting stuck with our problems won't make our problems any better.

 

2) they stick to their guns, and you see a handful of books like the CSM book released. It goes over like a lead baloon, just like it did when they pulled this malarky the last time we got a new book, and the design philosophy reverts, possibly with a typical GW staff overcompensation, just in time for books that are already powerful to become even more so. CSMs (and whoever else is unlucky enough to be released after us but before the gears shift), as 'unpopular armies', don't get revisited again until the release of 8th edition 40k, when, after a long streak of 'codex creep', they decide it's time to reverse the trend by putting out an uninspired and unimpressive chaos book yet a third time.

[Kol Saresk]

I see two likely results:

 

1) the simplified, powered down chaos book was a fluke, and ward brings the dark angels book looking exactly like one might have expected. The status quo moves forward as though the chaos book never happened. This is the future that I hope happens, given that I know others gettting stuck with our problems won't make our problems any better.

 

2) they stick to their guns, and you see a handful of books like the CSM book released. It goes over like a lead baloon, just like it did when they pulled this malarky the last time we got a new book, and the design philosophy reverts, possibly with a typical GW staff overcompensation, just in time for books that are already powerful to become even more so. CSMs (and whoever else is unlucky enough to be released after us but before the gears shift), as 'unpopular armies', don't get revisited again until the release of 8th edition 40k, when, after a long streak of 'codex creep', they decide it's time to reverse the trend by putting out an uninspired and unimpressive chaos book yet a third time.

Or or or or or or or, they go on a quest through the nightmarish landscape of the interwebs and hire people like Olis and Firestorm to become the next Codex writers.

 

I'm allowed to hope and dream right?

[Azekai]

I see two likely results:

 

1) the simplified, powered down chaos book was a fluke, and ward brings the dark angels book looking exactly like one might have expected. The status quo moves forward as though the chaos book never happened. This is the future that I hope happens, given that I know others gettting stuck with our problems won't make our problems any better.

 

2) they stick to their guns, and you see a handful of books like the CSM book released. It goes over like a lead baloon, just like it did when they pulled this malarky the last time we got a new book, and the design philosophy reverts, possibly with a typical GW staff overcompensation, just in time for books that are already powerful to become even more so. CSMs (and whoever else is unlucky enough to be released after us but before the gears shift), as 'unpopular armies', don't get revisited again until the release of 8th edition 40k, when, after a long streak of 'codex creep', they decide it's time to reverse the trend by putting out an uninspired and unimpressive chaos book yet a third time.

Or or or or or or or, they go on a quest through the nightmarish landscape of the interwebs and hire people like Olis and Firestorm to become the next Codex writers.

 

I'm allowed to hope and dream right?

Dreaming is fine- but it sounds like you are delusional to me. :eek

 

I think number 1. that Malisteen listed is by far the more likely outcome. I just can't see Ward taking a chill-pill; those DA are gonna be crazy stupid awesome as they ride their super-secret robolions into the sunset . . .

[Kol Saresk]

Hmm, I wonder if they're going to get cybernetic griffons instead of jetbikes for the Ravenwing.....

[Rain]

Well, vanilla marines and Blood Angels are both well balanced books and interesting from a list building/gameplay perspective I think. Actually from a gameplay standpoint I think that vanilla marines, BA, SW, and DE are the best books around and are what should be aimed for rules-wise. That said, as has been beaten to death, his most recent output has been a consistent string of hate crimes against neckbeards. Just going by my gut though, DA won't be as broken as his last two books. Will it be better than us? Yes. Will it actually contain a few "overpowered" options that will put this forum in a furor? Yes. But it won't be as bad as his last two miscarriages, if for no other reason than it seems like DA are kind of the red headed step children of the loyalists. The current designers don't seem to like them much either, so they will probably be BA level which is actually fine and which I would have preferred over what we got, especially since we got Wardian nonsense like the Helldrake anyway it's just that we didn't get the Wardian rules that make it not suck.

[Hannibal.Lictor]

I think there is a good list or two in the book, that being said, it feels half baked. I would wager that Kelly did alot of copy/paste with a little bit of editing...yay. Seriously, you couldnt come up with some new Unique HQs? We also have alot of redudndant units for under preforming slots (cc). If they would have made mutalators immune to Overwatch, now then they would be worth their points, and I would field the crap out of them. AS it stands, I have yet field, play against or seen on any board a list that contains them. I think NM are good now other than the champion issue (see half baked, sloppy work on Kelly's part....trust me I have two teenagers I know when the heart just aint in it.) Helchicken is another must have in an army. There are a few hidden gems, like teh DP with Blackmace, but I dont think this was intended.

 

What the hell where they thinking, in FA I can have a bike for 3 more points a dude, grab some extra T and move faster than a Raptor. Its stuff like that. I could spend 10 minuets and come up with a bunch of balanced stuff that would make that book shine. I had high hopes after playing SW and that Kelly dex. I am not certain he even wrote C:CSM. Dose HE have a bunch of lazy teenagers at his house doing shoddy work for him?

[Minsc]

If they would have made mutalators immune to Overwatch, now then they would be worth their points, and I would field the crap out of them. AS it stands, I have yet field, play against or seen on any board a list that contains them.

 

I actually fielded a unit of 3 Nurgle-Mutilators in a 2500pts game vs Tyranids today.

The Mutilators did exactly what I excpected them to do: absolutely nothing for the entire game.

 

I put them in deepstrike.

They came in on turn two, but scattered 6" further away from my opponent.

Turn 3: moved 6", now standing where I wanted them to come down t2.

Turn 4: moved 6", nothing to charge since my opponent had simply moved away from them.

Turn 5: tried to charge a unit of gaunts (the only thing in range). Failed the charge (he was in diff 5" away, I rolled 5,2,2)

Game ended.

 

I still managed to win, but I might as well not have bothered with the Mutilators.

 

The MVP of this game was 4 plaguemarines, including a champ and 2 plasmaguns. They got charged by 8 Raveners. I overwatched, did nothing, and then I was all like "Should I just remove them?" And he was all "No, one might survive, so you can't shoot me in your turn, heh."

After all the raveners attacks (32, hitting on 3+, rerolling 1's, wounding on 5+ with rending), he managed to do 4 wounds and 1 rending - I saved 4 wounds, and did 2 wounds to his raveners.

I won combat by 1, he failed his leadership, and his 8 Raveners (~300 pts) subesequently got run down by my 3 remaining Plague Marines (~80 pts). It was awesome, and we both laughed.