Crusade of Fire

[Kythnos]

By the way, did anyone notice that the special movements for flyers and the special traits for their pilots are missing some of the game's armies? There are no pilot traits for CSM for example. Might be a mistake with the German version, but if it's the same for other language versions of the book, I find that to be an unnecessary flaw of the book (which I otherwise really like a lot).

[Artein]

Noticed, probably because Heldrake doesn't have a pilot.

 

Black Templars don't have special manoeuvres, they have only aces. Do they have a Flyer? What about Space Wolves? They have manoeuvres and aces....

[Kol Saresk]

By the way, did anyone notice that the special movements for flyers and the special traits for their pilots are missing some of the game's armies? There are no pilot traits for CSM for example. Might be a mistake with the German version, but if it's the same for other language versions of the book, I find that to be an unnecessary flaw of the book (which I otherwise really like a lot).

I refer you to my review back on page 2 I believe. The flyers follow a common sense set up. The Heldrake has no pilot so it doesn't benefit from something for pilots. It's a mechanical monster that happens to have guns and jet engines. Tyranids suffer from the problem that all of their "flyers" are already fast attack jump units. Sisters use the same stuff the Imperial Guard use so they don't benefit from that. So their exclusion actually makes sense, from a common sense point of view. Everything is basically following "Does this army actually have their own unique flyers and do those flyers have pilots?"

[Kol Saresk]

Observation, everyone is ragging on Chaos performing horribly. But Phil Kelly had a Chaos army in his faction the entire campaign.

[Ammonius]

If I had been the project manager (acknowledging that I do not know any of the internal realities of the project), I would have really pushed for Crusade of Fire to be the book that shows how the new Chaos Codex is intended to be used.

but it shows very well how it ends up being used , so what is the problem ?

Heh. You and I both know what the problem is. :lol:

 

What I meant was that IF there is an intent for the new Chaos Codex beyond "sell Heldrakes" I would have wanted to showcase it in what looks, on the cover, to be a Chaos-centric product.

[Ammonius]

Observation, everyone is ragging on Chaos performing horribly. But Phil Kelly had a Chaos army in his faction the entire campaign.

It's not that Chaos performed horribly. It's that in the introductions of the Chaos players in the Servants of Ruin faction, they seemed to accept that there was no other possible outcome.

 

Since I'm at work, and cannot check, which armies were run by the Gamemasters?

[Kol Saresk]

The Alpha Legion army and all "indeginous" armies(armies that were a part of the map such as Traitor Guardsmen, Daemons and some Necrons).

 

EDIT: Also, I didn't get that vibe. To be honest, from every army except Phil Kelly's, I got a "This is how I view the army so I made it like this." Phil Kelly seemed to be really the only one who made an army with a focus other than fluff, according to his profile.

[Azekai]

I would have really pushed for Crusade of Fire to be the book that shows how the new Chaos Codex is intended to be used.

What are you talking about? That is exactly what GW did! We are supposed to be mustache-twirling, bland loonies that die to l33t spess mehrinez.

[Kol Saresk]

Except that one Chaos Army started out with the winning faction and in the end, two C: SM, a C: BA and a C:SW with a Reaver Titan, GK Allies and SoB allies lost out to not one, not two - no, not even three - but four Chaos armies, threeof which were fluff-based and a DE army. I don't even think PK used his Necron allies for that. But to be fair, I'm sure the almost-Chapter size IF army held back the Loyalists just like all of the Chaos players being converters and painters, not players, gave them an overpowering advantage.

 

 

Note: This post is loaded with sarcasm. Please tread carefully when responding or you might be blown sky-high.

[Agent Purple]

Didn't dark eldar win the campaign in the book (prophets of war)? I though this was a separate faction from forces of ruin (dosen't he even kill huron at one point?), but admittedly I haven't read the book in detail yet.

[Kol Saresk]

The Prophets of War were the Dark Eldar and the World Eaters that belonged to Wade Pryce(he says it on his army profile on page 26). In the Apocalypse game that closed out the campaign narrative, it was all-out everyone bring their entire collections no points value grabbed every single Titan that was at GW at that time with one side being the Crusade of Light and the other being the Servants of Ruin and the Prophets of War working together.

 

EDIT: And yes he did kill Huron in the Zone Mortalis game which was when Phil Kelly(Dark Eldar) and Matt Hutson(Red Corsairs) agreed to not kill each other until the object was secured and Phil Kelly waited until the Red Corsairs were in between the DE and everybody else before he double-teamed them and won by virtue of securing the objective(judging by the picture on page 57.)

[Spaz431]

My minor threadnomancy has brought back memories of 4chan...

 

Anyways.

I liked the book. I enjoy the special rules it brought to the game. I pretty much ignored any battle reports. Cause apparently NO ONE on this forum likes the guy that played dark eldar. And most of those lists are too fluff based to produce any kind of valuable battle report. Ill stick to getting my battle reports from Citadel Army Guy.

 

As a former DEldar player and a returning chaos, I enjoy Phil's work. He is not mat ward where there is only one build in a book *coughs*paladins. Yes, gw didn't give him the mega ok to create a new universe like they did with matcrons. So very competive writer, open book for army types. Yes, they other original legion could have used a stylized character. But I'm enjoying playing bad guys.

[Nehekhare]

He is not mat ward where there is only one build in a book

 

*cough* DE/CSM are monobuild codices.

[Kol Saresk]

You say that except there are multiple builds from this Codex that are doing fine. There might be only the one "efficient" build, but anyone is a liar if they say there is only just "one" build that can go toe-to-toe with the other Codices. Just go through the Liber Victorum. Heck, go through here. There was a tournament build that did decent that Jeske kept going "How did you win amything with this?"(possible exaggeration) So yes, I firmly stand in that opinion because it actually does have evidence to it. Everyone is finding out that there is more than one build, it's a matter of knowing what to use and when to use it.

 

So get a cough drop for your cough Nehekhare.

 

EDIT: Liar might be a harsh word, but it's the only one I have for people who willingly spread fasle information.

[Nehekhare]

hey the cough wasn't mine in the first place, kol! you can take whatever units you like, but still the variation of builds grows very thin on the top edge of successful lists. There is only so much that is efficient.

[Kol Saresk]

Points efficient, yes. Right now the top list isn't really because it's "the best", it's "I can take this unit to do the same thing for less which lets me put more out on the table." That is the current "top" build. But as long as there is more than one list, it's still not a monobuild list like the last Codex that had to have Dual Lash Princes, Berzerkers and/or PM and Oblits if you even wanted a chance of winning. That was a pure monobuild list and it was a nightmare. Right now, for the moment, we have variety. Maybe not the Nine Spammer Lists of Old, but it's there. Let's enjoy it until the next Codex comes out.

[Sception]

There doesn't seem to be all that much more variety now than then, though. More, sure, couldn't be less really, but not much more. Back then you still saw berzerkers vs. plagues, & termicide or no termicide.

 

Having a couple options in HQ, only one troop set up really, nothing in elites, 'bikes or drakes' in fast and 'havocs or oblits' in heavy... that's just not a good amount of variety. More than last time? sure. Enough that we're really going to call 'two squads of oblits & one squad of havocs vs. two squads of havocs and one squad of oblits" or "huron vs. axebike" legitimately different builds? Not really, not in my book.

 

So yeah, better than the last book? Sure. Enough real variety to keep this faction fun and interesting for another five years? No. No, it really isn't. The most notable difference in chaos builds is whether to ally and which faction you ally with, and that's kind of sad to me.

 

I'm happy 40k isn't my only wargame, & chaos not my only army. I've still got vamp counts in fantasy (yeah, it's not perfect, there's a couple dud units & options, but it's really hard to believe it was written by the same guy) and Mordor in LotR. And in terms of real variety, both in terms of viable builds and in terms of those builds actually playing in distinctly different ways, there's really no comparison between 6e CSMs and those factions.

 

If you only play 40k, and only play chaos, then yeah, the new book looks much better than the old one. But if you play any other armies, or any other games, you quickly see that the new book really isn't up to par, just a half hearted sprucing up of the mess we had before.

[Kol Saresk]

Remember the "I can get the same or better for less?" There are still Raptors in FA. If there is relatively no cover, Warp Talons can work for you too if you bother to think and go around the cover instead of through it. Provided you don't care about points efficiency, the one absolute everyone builds their armies around. Possessed fit in the same category.You can have a viable Lord with the Murder Sword, the Axe of Blind Fury or the Black Mace. Actually any weapon he is currently able to carry(note, the Key is not a weapon). And then you can put him on a Steed, Juggernaut, Bike, fly with some Raptors, put him with some Terminators or if you feel the desire, Cultists, CSM and maybe even Chosen. Daemon Princes, you can run them with similar options as the Lord, although wings seem to be a fan favorite at the moment. They can also be used as close combat psykers either with the CC being a defense option or the psyker bit taking the backseat. And then there's the sorcerers. Fan favorite seems to be Level Three Nurgle, but Tzeentch, Slaanesh and Undivided seem to be working too. A rather recent arrival of "common" ideas is to give it the Brand of Skalathrax. Elites, everyone seems to ignore the Cult Units in favor of the CSM Troops because no one really wants to use the Cults for Elite options and they just were not made as Troop choices. Chosen are still okay although the loss of Infiltrate has hit them rather hard. You can Plasmacide, Meltacide or retinue. Probably more options but no one really cares to find out what. Terminators, Termicide or retinue is their most common use sadly. Can't say much there. Hellbrutes..... Well at least they don't kill our own armies anymore. Troops, well we have Cultists and CSM. Cultists can be good for meat shields. Apparently can serve as semi-competent objective campers, although I'd feel better about them if they had something like grenade launchers. Zombies are okay too from what I hear. CSM. Plasma-spam. Melta-spam. MoK, MoN, MoS. IoV. VoTLW seems to be a must for most people. Most of my meta is SM so I can't disagree with it. HS, Havocs seem to be good with being a Plasmacide if you don't mind giving up the HS slot. AC-spam is the most common thing. You can set up Flak Missile spam too or split 50-50 between the two. I'm sure there's a few more builds but it will take someone who actually wants to see something different to find them since no one cares. Forgefiends are somewhat decent with three builds. Maulerfiends, I'm sure they'd be great if you could actually get them to close in with something but that AV12 does hold them back quite a bit. Oblits, well everyone still seems to like them. Land Raiders, great for mobile cover. Preds, same thing as the Land Raider. It might be because I don't care about points efficiency in the least that I see all of this and I really don't care for probability because I'm one of those people probability seemed to go "Haha screw you!" to. But it's there, it just takes looking past those two trees and suddenly you will find that there is a whole forest. Also, it depends on what your meta is.

[Sception]

Remember the "I can get the same or better for less?" There are still Raptors in FA.

Build variety should mean more than just units that look different. Not only are bikes more effective than raptors for the points, but they also play more or less the same on their field. Trading bikes for raptors doesn't result in an army that plays or feels any different, it doesn't result in an actually different build, just the same build that plays the same way, but less effectively.

 

Compare Vamp Counts. Grave Guard, Black Knights, and Crypt Horrors are all special units that can provide a strong core to your battle line, but they all play very differently on the table. Or Mordor in LotR, cheap orcs vs. elite Numenorians or Black Orcs, warg riders vs. armored knights, etc. Units that are meaningfully different.

 

Spawn would be a better example than Raptors in the new chaos book. Yeah, they're less efficient than your bikes, probably less effective on the table, but they play in a decidedly different manner, being cheap fast distraction guys instead of a more substantial investment for delivering special weapons & significant melee pressure early.

 

But my games so far have hammered home that I need at least a unit of that fast, hard hitting, serious threat. The infantry just isn't fast enough, and raptors not tough enough, and talons way to pricey for their points. Bikes just don't feel optional to me.

 

 

If there is relatively no cover, Warp Talons can work for you too if you bother to think and go around the cover instead of through it. Provided you don't care about points efficiency, the one absolute everyone builds their armies around.

If there's no cover, warp talons are threatening but insanely vulnerable and too expensive to throw away as a distraction. If there's lots of cover, your talons might (might) see combat, but are much less threatening (and they're already only really threatening against a relatively narrow range of potential targets, since they can't do AV and they can't do AP2 and they're overkill for geqs).

 

 

Possessed fit in the same category.

Possessed are under a special category with Berzerkers for "melee unit with no way to get to melee". Rhinos don't do it, and they're both to expensive to viably take in big units and hoof it. You can maybe get some use out of them if you infiltrate them with Huron or Ahriman, but I don't like units that require special characters to even really consider using them. These units needed an assault transport. Chaos in general needed an assault transport - something other than the terrible land raider. Possessed also suffer the Warp Talon failings of lack of grenades and difficulty dealing with things outside of a relatively narrow range of ideal targets, and are rather unreliable even then due to the random ability roll. Possessed (like Thousand Sons) really needed a complete overhaul, and didn't get it.

 

 

You can have a viable Lord with the Murder Sword

I disagree. I've tried a lot - I love my Dark Vengeance lord - but I really disagree.

 

 

the Axe of Blind Fury or the Black Mace. Actually any weapon he is currently able to carry(note, the Key is not a weapon). And then you can put him on a Steed, Juggernaut, Bike, fly with some Raptors, put him with some Terminators or if you feel the desire

There's some meaningful diversity in the lord. Less than I had anticipated going into the book, and they're not the duelists they should be given the champions of chaos rule that's been shoved down our throats, and I'm bitter that there's so little functionality for infantry lords given the fantastic Dark Vengeance model, but in general my complaints about the lords are minimal. But again, are you really going to swap out one lord for another, trade bikes for raptors, and try and tell me that's a meaningfully different build?

 

 

Cultists, CSM and maybe even Chosen.

Our last book had berzerkers, plagues, CSMs (with nearly as many options as now), Noise Marines (melee or sonic based), and Thousand Sons. If you're just going by what units are available, the last book had tons of build variety! What was anybody complaining about? I guess we were all whiners, and the 4th edition book was an awesome treasure trove of diverse chaos army builds!

 

Oh, wait, you're telling me that only one or two of those myriad options were ever played, because they were blatantly better than the other options, several of which were just bad on their own even without comparison?

 

Ok, sure, but then again that's the same as now.

 

 

It might be because I don't care about points efficiency in the least that I see all of this and I really don't care for probability because I'm one of those people probability seemed to go "Haha screw you!" to. But it's there, it just takes looking past those two trees and suddenly you will find that there is a whole forest. Also, it depends on what your meta is.

If you don't care about points efficiency or your units just being awful on the battlefield then the last book had plenty of variety, too, and the 'mono build' was all in your head. But it wasn't in your head, was it? Points efficiency does matters. Units having the tools to actually function in their battlefield role does matter.

 

Furthermore, the drastic set of changes in the 6e ruleset also matters, and as such the lazy, half hearted attitude of our update that doesn't even try to take those changes into consideration certainly matters. Several units not working matters, units being blatantly superior versions of other units matters, special rules and options that don't work matters and all together yes, we do seem to be falling back into a new monobuild that will quickly become nearly as boring as the last one, with the only real diversity being 'huron or generic HQ' and 'daemon or ig allies'.

 

 

We may yet see some more diversity out of the special characters - I'm skeptical, but still curious about the possibility of terminator heavy forces infiltrating with Ahriman or Huron. And I'd love to hear of somebody making the Abby / chosen thing work - though I'm doubly skeptical there (both abby and chosen being soooo expensive, and chosen not being all that much more effective than basic CSMs for the price). And Typhus of course has his plagues and zombies thing going.

 

Again, I'm not trying to say our current book isn't better than the last one on this issue. It is. I'm just arguing that it isn't enough better. The last book was so awful for fun and meaningful variety that the new book as plenty of room to be much much better, while still not being good. And, looking at the meaningful diversity available to my other armies, or to other 40k factions, and looking at the kinds of lists being written for this book, then yeah, that's feeling more and more the case to me.

[the jeske]

EDIT: Also, I didn't get that vibe. To be honest, from every army except Phil Kelly's, I got a "This is how I view the army so I made it like this." Phil Kelly seemed to be really the only one who made an army with a focus other than fluff, according to his profile.

every army which is legal is automaticly fluffy .

 

what I dont understand about chaos part of the book is why doesnt it get flyer aces etc FW has other chaos flyers. which is odd because armies that dont have built in flyers do get to roll .

 

 

You can have a viable Lord with the Murder Sword

I am sorry , but was there a faq or errata to the Murder Sword I missed ?

 

I guess we were all whiners, and the 4th edition book was an awesome treasure trove of diverse chaos army builds!

;) As If I was reading legatus again .

 

I'm skeptical, but still curious about the possibility of terminator heavy forces infiltrating with Ahriman or Huron

get wooped hard by flyer builds . even if you spam termiantors 3x8 and flakk units with minimal troops. God I wish they made abadon our troop terminator HQ. chosen suck and even if they somehow didnt it would change little in our game play . if chosen were optimal . we would just all play abadon+something and chosen and no csm/pms .

 

Chosen are still okay although the loss of Infiltrate has hit them rather hard.

what does "ok" mean them . they cant melee and cant be run like csm [too high cost and if we try to run them as troops the tax to take them is huge] . they can do a plasma unit , but then their life is very short . in fact if for the same points someone takes terminators they live longer and shot just as offten[aka 1 turn]. even pms if someone runs a nurgle lord are better . fewer shots , but no tax [unless I dont know someone has to run tyfus] and they shot longer because they live longer . In fact with fewer plasma[2vs5] they offten do more dmg then chosen , just because they surive till turn 2-3 . If they still had infiltrate , we could talk about the viability of rhino outflanking and almost always getting rapid fire[10 plasma shots are always good] , but they dont have it. they can have it through huron , but so can units which are already better then them [termis/pms even csm] .

 

But it's there, it just takes looking past those two trees and suddenly you will find that there is a whole forest

am sorry , but we can run fewer av14/13 then IG , sometimes fewer then other meq armies[bA av13 spam for example or list runing 2xSR for GK/BAs] . other good armies have to be able to beat those high av armies , they will easily deal with our 2-3 av13-14 targets because they have to deal with 4-5 av13-14 for other armies . I dont see your your forest . I see different trees , but not a new forest.

[Kol Saresk]

snip(sorry but that was quite a bit

Well since I took the short quote route, I will try to address everything. But first, let me start out with no, I am not simply listing everything in the Codex. I've actually missed some stuff. Also, I didn't just say everything was fine and dandy just because I listed it. Some had conditions to them. Example, the Warp Talons and Possessed. The biggest problem everyone has isn't getting them into CC, ironically. It's the fact that they can't just charge through cover because of no grenades. Best way around that is to simply go around the cover. Or, if you happen to be at my LGS where there is a table that has no cover unless you or your opponent brings some in(basically it's just a giant lava board), you don't have to worry about charging through cover and attacking at I1.

 

Second, unfortunately I have the impression that you didn't really read my post. Part of this stemming from the fact that you isolated a quote about "Cultists, CSM or even Chosen" but conveniently or simply missed(as I hope is the case) the part where that sentence began with "You can run your Chaos Lord with these guys."

 

Also, there is a difference between how something plays and how something feels. It's a little hard to explain. More or less I classify "feel" with "what is the style, motivation or driving force behind what your army is" while "play" is "what you actually do during games, you know, the forgotten art of tactics."

 

And fourth, apparently the people at my LGS are a lot more forgiving than the whoever you play with because they are there to have fun and like me, they don't care about winning. If it happens it happens but they aren't going to get butt hurt about losing either and they don't believe in Winning At All Costs. And this is where the Murder Sword fits in because when I went through Crusade of Fire, the guy with the SW reminded me of someone with a BA army at the LGS because they still go for CC and they do believe in "epic" battles between the lead HQ units of each army and he will go out of his way to make it happen. So Murder Sword is a plus there. Granted, the AP3 bit isn't the best thing against SM but the concept of retinues and APCs were invented for a reason.

 

Fifth, I must point out for the hundredth time or so, I do not use points efficiency the same way you or jeske does. Y'all use it to get the cheapest, most effective suicide unit(let's face it, the tournament list is made with the idea of being a suicide army because for some reason that's all everyone wants to do). I use it as, "Hmm, what units are semi-useable and I can get the most fun out of using?" Notice, semi-useable means a unit that can be used and is relatively useable without being a "surefire shot to victory." For some, that may mean a Dark Apostle running with a meat shield of Cultists. For others, that may mean the one-dimensional WAAC list. For everyone else, it may mean whatever gets their dig.

 

Now, I agree with you, that this Codex is not the cream of the crop. But then again, something as varied(note, varied as in diverse, not random) as the Chaos Space Marine faction is always going to run into problems. There isn't any one focus there's multiple. And to be honest, I think the best Codex that we can ever hope to get, is the viability(notice the wording) of 3.5 with the variety of this Codex. And something higher than AV12 for our Daemon Engines because that is so totally stupid. Actually scratch that, what we need is a GW who actually listens to the playtesters because apparently they do exist.

[Agent Purple]

All chaos really has is suicide unit and few other cheap tricks.

 

Chaos gets termicide for dirt cheap, chosen with 5 specs, 5 man raptors with combi & 2 specs, 5 man PM with 2 specs...

 

One of chaos' only advantages is that they can take MSU and bring more specials to the field than other marine armies.

 

What else do they get? Some AP3 flamers (helldrake, burning brand), cheap bikes, relatively cheap ML3 psykers, I guess zombies and spawn are ok... Cheap lascannon predator, oblits are still decent too I guess. They also get AP2 melee attacks at I on the lord.

 

All the CSM units themselves (aside from bikes) are in general just crappier versions of other marine units. So outside of HQ and Fast, chaos dosen't really bring anything meaningful to the table. CSM can take all the marks they want, they are still worse than greys, tacticals, or assault marines (take your pick). Havocs are OK, but not that much better than devs, and way worse than fangs. Chosen are worse than sternguard or wolf guard, TS are just bad in general. NM are ok but somewhat expensive and limited in role. PM are good I guess. Possessed, berzerkers, and mutilators aren't even really comparable to other marine elite assault units. Raptors are better than vanilla assault marines, but not BA assault marines. Helbrute is comparable but not really better than a vanilla dread (they can get pod and rifleman), deamon engines other than drake are kind of meh to begin with. Cultists are just crappy guardsmen that marines can ally-in battle brother style (and guard are already a good ally pick).

 

If you try to build your chaos around things other than the 'points efficient' choices, you will quickly realize that you can build an army that is functionally the same, but either cheaper or stronger using another marine dex. Why even play chaos at this point? I guess you can ally with deamons to get OP flamers & screamers.... Otherwise its just like playing marines -1.

[Sception]

Well since I took the short quote route, I will try to address everything. But first, let me start out with no, I am not simply listing everything in the Codex. I've actually missed some stuff. Also, I didn't just say everything was fine and dandy just because I listed it.

If it's not fine, don't list it in your list of stuff that's fine.

 

I did read your whole post, but trimmed things down because it was too long, and almost everything boiled down to a single point.

 

Do you believe the last book suffered from monobuild problems? If not, we live in different worlds and there's no point debating. If so, then look back at that book, and see how they had

 

Lords - bike, jump, terminator, with a different good daemon weapon for each alignment

Sorcerers with a variety of powers

Princes that could be infantry or winged, psychic powers or none

five different troops choices with different builds

several elite, fast, & heavy choices.

 

Does the new book have more total choices? Yes, a few. But lack of total choices wasn't what caused the monobuild problem in the last book, lack of balance in those choices caused it. With some units that were too effective (lash prince), some that were too cheap (plague marines), some that were ok, but just outclassed by another more efficient choice (chaos marines), and some that were just bad (possessed, dreadnought, thousand sons).

 

And all of those problems are problems the new book still has. We still have units that are too effective (drake), or too cheap (bikes), or ok, but outclassed by some other unit that's functionally the same but better (apostles, raptors), or just bad (talons, possessed, thousand sons still). And we're again starting to see a monobuild develop, w/ HQ split between lord & sorc, minimal elites, plasmamarine troops, Fast split between bikes and drakes, and Heavy split between Havocs and Oblits. Maybe some cultists or the odd single mut for points filler. Maybe daemons or guard allies.

 

As for variety - Space wolves have more real build variety. Guard have more real build variety. Necrons have more real build variety. Chaos doesn't suffer from lack of variety because the fluff for chaos is too diverse, chaos suffers from lack of variety because the last book sucked, and the current book used it as its foundation, minimally sprucing it up before selling us basically the same thing again. It's simply a lack of effort put into this release, because the writer simply wasn't as engaged as he was on other projects.

[Kol Saresk]

Well since I took the short quote route, I will try to address everything. But first, let me start out with no, I am not simply listing everything in the Codex. I've actually missed some stuff. Also, I didn't just say everything was fine and dandy just because I listed it.

If it's not fine, don't list it in your list of stuff that's fine.

 

I did read your whole post, but trimmed things down because it was too long, and almost everything boiled down to a single point.

My first paragraph. Skipping little details like say, the next sentence, or even part of the sentence, when the two go together and create a different meaning than what you are presenting, is why I am led to believe you are just skipping. That's not "trimming the fat", that is intentionally(once is a mistake, twice, not so much) misleading. And you can tell the two go together if you actually read the words, rather than just seeing them.

snip(sorry but that was quite a bit

Well since I took the short quote route, I will try to address everything. But first, let me start out with no, I am not simply listing everything in the Codex. I've actually missed some stuff. Also, I didn't just say everything was fine and dandy just because I listed it. Some had conditions to them.

Notice the difference? You are giving the impression that I listed bad units and tried to pass them off as good when 1.) I listed the units and 2.) the cases that some of these units were actually decent, or useable. Not tournament worthy and not anything you will ever see in a WAAC, Top Tier, Ultra-Competitve, Tournament list. Just something that if used appropriately by someone who bothers to learn how, is useable.

Do you believe the last book suffered from monobuild problems? If not, we live in different worlds and there's no point debating. If so, then look back at that book, and see how they had

Lords - bike, jump, terminator, with a different good daemon weapon for each alignment

Sorcerers with a variety of powers

Princes that could be infantry or winged, psychic powers or none

five different troops choices with different builds

several elite, fast, & heavy choices.

I do believe the last edition had monobuild problems. It was also a monovariant list too, as you described. Nowhere have I ever said otherwise. Anyone who thinks I have actually needs to go back and read what I have written. And I actually mean read, not go "Jimmy. Went. Through. The Door. So Jimmy can walk through doors while they're closed?"

 

Does the new book have more total choices? Yes, a few. But lack of total choices wasn't what caused the monobuild problem in the last book, lack of balance in those choices caused it. With some units that were too effective (lash prince), some that were too cheap (plague marines), some that were ok, but just outclassed by another more efficient choice (chaos marines), and some that were just bad (possessed, dreadnought, thousand sons).

 

And all of those problems are problems the new book still has. We still have units that are too effective (drake), or too cheap (bikes), or ok, but outclassed by some other unit that's functionally the same but better (apostles, raptors), or just bad (talons, possessed, thousand sons still). And we're again starting to see a monobuild develop, w/ HQ split between lord & sorc, minimal elites, plasmamarine troops, Fast split between bikes and drakes, and Heavy split between Havocs and Oblits. Maybe some cultists or the odd single mut for points filler. Maybe daemons or guard allies.

Yes and no. Yes, some of our units still suck. Dreadnoughts, KSons, Noise Marines, although the Noise Marines are better. Just not as Troops. Which is the case for most of the Cult Units. They work better as Elites. Except the KSons. If you can get those guys to work on something other than a 500 points list, my hat is off to you sir/ma'am. The units are internally unbalanced. Yes, they are. No where have I said the Codex was balanced. But it's a damn sight more usable than the last Codex. And like I said, contrary to popular belief, 3.5 is not the Codex we need to create and neither is 4th Edition. We need something new. And neither have the proper basis because both were unbalanced. The difference is one was an ork cleaver and the last one was a stunt prop. At least you can kill something with a cleaver.

As for variety - Space wolves have more real build variety. Guard have more real build variety. Necrons have more real build variety. Chaos doesn't suffer from lack of variety because the fluff for chaos is too diverse, chaos suffers from lack of variety because the last book sucked, and the current book used it as its foundation, minimally sprucing it up before selling us basically the same thing again. It's simply a lack of effort put into this release, because the writer simply wasn't as engaged as he was on other projects.

Necrons have variety. Right. So, how many lists do you see other than the Scythe Spam? How many different SW lists do you see that are actually different? And I am asking in the same way you asked me in your last post. How many are truly different? None. They have variants, but not variety, as you classified it. Variety as you define, might exist in those Codices. Don't really look at them. I just look at what does come out of them, not what might. And right now, I am seeing a lot more actually come out of our Codex and hit the table, than I see coming out of the Codices you list. Not variants, but actually different lists. They ain't the best lists in the world, let me make that clear so no one can say I said they were. But they do work from time to time when someone bothers to learn how to use them in a way other than "Well if the dice gods favor my mathhammer with sixes, I will slaughter everything in my path. Muawahahaha!"*cue mustache twirling*

 

And the diversity is the problem, although not from the viewpoint you see it as. Imagine as a writer, you have to find a way to take the most diverse faction in 40k and find a way to stuff it one tiny book. It's a pain. If GW had someone like Wade Pryce, or someone who gave a crap about playing Chaos, it would still be a pain but we would be happy(happ-ier) with the result. But we didn't. Instead we have had two writers who have proven that they don't care about the faction. And it shows in their work, just as it shows when an author is forced to write a book they don't want to. It shows when you as a student write an essay. You can read it and see from the tone used that the author really didn't care. Nowhere have I said this Codex is amazing. But, it is better than the last Codex, no one can argue that fact. If you are someone who doesn't care and you are told "Find a way to represent nine factions that are broken down into warbands and seven of which are no longer functioning in any kind of cohesive manner and find a way to still have a tenth or even eleven different ways of playing(when two of those factions can never truly be represented on a tabletop) and come up with rules." Do you honestly believe you are going to do it? No. Unfortunately, GW does have the view that Chaos is nothing more than a smattering of warbands with the exception of the Black Legion and the Word Bearers. There is no unity and there are no Legions. To me, that would mean you have a crapton of variety due to a multitude of ideologies, methods and only the gods know how much backstabbing. To Gav Thorpe, Phil Kelly and GW, that means they just have to do the "Happy Chaos Family"(which is a rather ignorant view, both from the creators and anyone who believes in its existence) and that is where we suffer from it. Despite that, it is a sight better than the last Codex and if you are actually willing to work around some of the deficiencies(some can never be worked around), then you find that there is more than Lord with AoBF on Jugger, Termicide, Plasma-Spam CSM with MoK, Bikers with Plasma-spam and Autocannon-Spam Havocs. Of course, it is something that takes effort which is something that is sadly lacking in much of today's society.

[Sception]

You want me to respond to every line of a big block of text with no paragraph breaks? OK. I mean, I did before, but the response was predictably monstrous so I hacked out the middle, but if that's not cool, I can do this again.

 

edit: oh, wait, no, I am literally not allowed to post this many quote blocks on this forum.

 

DOUBLE EDIT you know what, this is super long, off topic, and ended up in the exact same place as my last reply, so I'll just PM the whole thing.

 

postscript: Also, I just spent two hours writing a giganting post that involved more quoting than the board even allows, all of which boiling down to the same bloody point as last time I responded to this message. So maybe next time when I say "the response was two long, so I deleted part of it", maybe you can just give me the benefit of the doubt?