Codex:Space Marine for Iron Warriors?

[Beachymike123]

Although i've read and i do like the new codex:CSM, i feel theres a bit of lack lustre in the pages. i'm not saying its a bad codex, just a bit misrepresented is all. however, i've been playing iron warriors for a lil' bit now and i was thinking - why not use codex: space marines? my problem with the chaos marine codex is for me it doesn't give Perturabo's children justice, especially as they are renowned for their affinity with technology. the iron warriors are known for still being in a largely cohesive force when compared to the other traitor legions (i know WB and BL still have good hierarchy etc bit to me IW are the legion to learn from), as well as their use of technology and cannon fodder.

i guess what i'm asking is have other players had any success when using C:SM and if so how do they fair? i'll be honest and also say it would tie in nicely with my traitor guard but i wanna weigh up pro's and con's etc. i can see one negative straight away - small squads equals no special weapons etc but would love the transport options left open if using the SM codex. so what are people's thoughts on this?

[Iron Warrior w/ Servo Arm]

Why not use the old 3.5 codex instead? If it is a friendly game it should not matter. If you really want you can even use the Lost and Damned as allies.

[Beachymike123]

Why not use the old 3.5 codex instead? If it is a friendly game it should not matter. If you really want you can even use the Lost and Damned as allies.

 

i get that, but i'm aiming for a force represents ties to the dark mechanicus in both fluff and rules (i find it easier if both are tied together). lords could easily SM captains, warpsmiths can be either techmarines MotF etc. with MotF the rules given would better represent dreadies in IW armies, plus the fact that guard (in my case traitor) are battle brothers and better lead by their masters is a plus bonus. i find with the new C:CSM that the new daemon engines aren't the best of ways of representing the dark technologies coming from the warp, although they do represent good innovations to tear the imperium down. but with IW i can see them using new/darker/both technologies to assault with. like many SM army lists, they can contain firepower but they are also able to deal out a great degree of CQC damage.

[Aidoneus]

Yeah, I've done that, and it works just fine. Grab a Master of the Forge, some dreadnoughts, a thunderfire cannon, basic troops, a vindicator... it's all there. If you're gaming group will let you stretch the rules just a little bit, you could even use the allies system to take the few things you may want from the chaos 'dex (treat them as allies of convenience or something).

[Nehekhare]

SM MotF and dreads/ironclads in drop pods are certainly viable choices, but the troops suck. BA have assault troops, lots of dreads and death company-counts-as-berzerkers. SW have solid troops, long fangs-counts-as-havocs and a dread character. DA rumors tell of special fortifications and techmarines. all better codices than C:CSMeh.

 

but while effective, the IG being battle brothers put me off: never would the IV consider them as equal.

 

alltogether, my tip still is the HH legion list...book 2 will feature dark mechanicum :nuke:

[Chronotonic]

The 4th edition sm codex worked better for iron warriors...with those converges the tech marine was hitting with 2 powerfist and usually 4 or so power weapon attacks at int.

 

Miss that a lot....

[Beachymike123]

but while effective, the IG being battle brothers put me off: never would the IV consider them as equal.

 

this is partly true, as the IW view everyone who isn't IW with contempt, but i get where you're coming from. the only reason i'm doing it like this is my TG are part of a dark mechanicum horde, and love the idea of a traitor legionnaire MotF leading a blob squad of skitarii. but thats a different kettle of fish altogether.

thanks to everyone who has replied, i'll certainly be making the transition away from C:CSM later today when i face my neighbour for a game. happy gaming to everyone.

[Artein]

Wait.... what?

 

I believe that Iron Warriors are second best represented Legion in the new Codex (Black Legion being the first of course).

 

We have Cultists as a cheap cannon fodder, Warpsmiths for some warpy-technological stuff and 3 new daemon engines. Add to that our standard Obliterators, tanks, Helbrutes/Dreads, Havocs....

Whats wrong with that?

[Lieutenant Steel]

Wait.... what?

 

I believe that Iron Warriors are second best represented Legion in the new Codex (Black Legion being the first of course).

 

We have Cultists as a cheap cannon fodder, Warpsmiths for some warpy-technological stuff and 3 new daemon engines. Add to that our standard Obliterators, tanks, Helbrutes/Dreads, Havocs....

Whats wrong with that?

I'd argue that it would be tough fielding an effective and themed IW army with the current codex, seeing as nearly every single one of the options which best represent them come in the HS slots; outside of double force organisation charts you'd struggle to pack enough punch without relying on weaker/ non-fluffy options.

[the jeske]

Wait.... what?

 

I believe that Iron Warriors are second best represented Legion in the new Codex (Black Legion being the first of course).

 

We have Cultists as a cheap cannon fodder, Warpsmiths for some warpy-technological stuff and 3 new daemon engines. Add to that our standard Obliterators, tanks, Helbrutes/Dreads, Havocs....

Whats wrong with that?

 

smiths are bad . you cant build a working around drakes . maulers are bad and forges are av12 walkers and much less needed then havocks or oblits , while at the same time all 4 of those units sit in hvy support section.

dreads are bad in 6th in general and ours are worse , because we cant get hand on drop pods and/or av13 ones.

You can play an army which uses drakes and havocks/oblits , but then the natural thing to do is to add bikers and either pms/nurgle lord or csm/khorn ax lord . And what that happens you have a list which is identical to the one everyone else uses .

 

Non BL legions are dead as far as list building goes . Worring about how to make a NL/IW/AL list isnt very costructive.

 

And as tanks/mecha lists goes ther are other meq dexs that do it better.

[Beachymike123]

the thing is i enjoy playing planetstreike too, both as attacker and defender, and to me IW are one of the best armies who can do that. its like i say, C:CSM isn't bad, but it just doesn't match my expectations for legions (and i know C:SW is fairly close to a legion list but again, its not what i'm after) and the style of play i'm after. HH:B looks like it might contain a few answers, but i also don't fancy having to take out a small mortgage for it. will have to wait and see what book 2 will bring (cheers for the heads up Nehekhare) as to more DMech stuff too. with C:SM, theres more to build a fluffy and effective list, although i do appreciate there are better dexes out there, i have to work with what i have atm. plus, i also love the opportunity to field a MotF on bike leading a unit of converted attack bikes (maybe a new obliterator strain conversion me thinks :ph34r: ).

[Lord_Caerolion]

So the big thing, the thing that your Codex must be able to represent, is attack bikes?

You're throwing away the option for actual Obliterators, Daemon Engines, Marks of Chaos, and everything else Chaos gets, so you can get attack bikes that you can model as a new sort of Obliterator? I'm sorry, but that makes no sense to me. Iron Warrior players don't really have any excuse to be upset with this book.

 

I mean, I have nothing against you using the Loyalist book, if that's what you want. It just seems strange that you think that the Daemon Engines don't properly represent the "dark technologies coming from the Warp", but that attack bikes do...

[Polaria]

smiths are bad . you cant build a working around drakes .

 

Warpsmiths are bad at being "smiths", but they are pretty damn awesome once you get into close combat. And what was that bit about the Heldrakes? Are you serious? Heldrake is one of the best units in any codex at this moment...

[Nehekhare]

Iron Warrior players don't really have any excuse to be upset with this book.

 

Let it be told to you by an iron warriors player that we had very high hopes for this dex because of the rumors about legion specific characters, a dark mechanicus character and new demon engines. Exactly these high hopes are the reasons that we have indeed cause to be upset, maybe even more than anybody else (save TS). What we got was overpriced, lacklustre and sub par rip-offs from SM (techmarine) and GK (psifledread), while practically NOTHING of those options appear in competive lists (with good reason). oh yeah, the anal turkey is now the flyer of the month...it's not IW, it's a tzeentch air force unit from epic. On the other side, those options IW didn't use (FA: bikes, spawn, raptors, other marked units) got cheaper (if not better). our prime unit, the obliterators now have to be nurgle-marked and lost fearless. the tanks, the artillery? copy/pasted same old crap. The one chaos monolist doesn't look or feel anything like IW. BL or DG, maybe. Don't tell us we have no excuse to be upset. We don't need an excuse...

[Lord_Caerolion]

I was going to write up a big reply to that, Nehekhare, but I just can't be bothered anymore. I'm tired of the endless cynicism on this subforum, tired of the constant bitching and whining about every single facet of the game. I've tried to push through it, but you've made me actively dislike coming to these forums. I want to read interesting commentaries about Chaos, about our tactics, about peoples armies. Instead, for every good post I see, it seems I see another 3 whining about how Space Wolves are more points-effective, and how if you want an effective army you should just play Grey Knights. I'm done with it. Goodbye to you all.

[Beachymike123]

So the big thing, the thing that your Codex must be able to represent, is attack bikes?

You're throwing away the option for actual Obliterators, Daemon Engines, Marks of Chaos, and everything else Chaos gets, so you can get attack bikes that you can model as a new sort of Obliterator? I'm sorry, but that makes no sense to me. Iron Warrior players don't really have any excuse to be upset with this book.

 

I mean, I have nothing against you using the Loyalist book, if that's what you want. It just seems strange that you think that the Daemon Engines don't properly represent the "dark technologies coming from the Warp", but that attack bikes do...

 

no no sunshine, i was saying attack bikes can be used as a strain of obliterators and that a MotF can lead them, not that its an entire basis for leaving the chaos marine codex. i'm getting rid of the marks of chaos which are virtually a must in the dex and not in my eyes fluffy for IWs except for zerkers; all of the daemon engines are nice but again, there are better ways to represent the dark technologies of the warp with the other PA codexes (different marks of LR, dreads etc), and with IW i see alot of dreads so again MotF comes in useful; IW fluff says they are one of the most cold blooded legions and don't back down, who have a great degree of discipline and hierarchy, a rule best represented by ATSKNF (although i appreciate that there are other legions/warbands who can benefit from this, WB or AL being some as they maintain a greater hierarchy and discipline). theres also the ability to represent better veterans too, vanguard being armed to take on different tasks, sternguard with SIA can represent experiments with DM. even the HQs are better off - as already said MotF can unlock different options both modelling and FOC; a chapter master can be used in lieu of a lord to represent artillery bombardments and (IMO) take fluffier wargear (relic blades from the heresy, TH for some armour busting, digi-weapons that represent bionics built in etc). the only true let down from the codex switch is the inability to take an extra pistol/ccw, but this can easily be negated by covering this weakness with other units. i do apologise but i seem to have gone on a bit of a rant there, my apologies.

what i'm saying is is that the IW appear to get a good deal from the book, but thats only at a glance. i want the ability to have an effective and fluffy list, something i feel we don't get and that we were short changed on with this dex. to me, the III legion had a better deal with the 3.5 dex and even the IA article from WD, but it seems that instead of going forward with the codex, it appears that GW has gone back to the JJ dex of 3.0, which felt like a codex that was put there for the sake of being there. another plus for me is that the loyalist dex has a more techy edge whereas the chaos one doesn't - all we've received is a couple of units that are mediocre at best that don't quite match up to par. i'm not saying i want a codex that can deal with everyone (i have a fluffy DE army for that, a very well written and great codex which is ironic considering it is also written by Phil Kelly), but a codex should at least be able to represent the faction it says without the player holding their heads going 'why oh why'.

[Hazath]

I was going to write up a big reply to that, Nehekhare, but I just can't be bothered anymore. I'm tired of the endless cynicism on this subforum, tired of the constant bitching and whining about every single facet of the game. I've tried to push through it, but you've made me actively dislike coming to these forums. I want to read interesting commentaries about Chaos, about our tactics, about peoples armies. Instead, for every good post I see, it seems I see another 3 whining about how Space Wolves are more points-effective, and how if you want an effective army you should just play Grey Knights. I'm done with it. Goodbye to you all.

 

 

Good Riddance :tu:

[Nehekhare]

Goodbye to you all.

 

*tips hat*

[the jeske]

And nothing of worth was lost .

 

Good options for codex sm based IW armies are FW units and FW ally . There are some realy nice [if your opponents are ok to play against FW stuff] siege stuff from FW , not only good , but also very in flavor for IW. artilery , siege units and unlike chaos you can sometimes battlebrother them in .

[Xenith]

i find with the new C:CSM that the new daemon engines aren't the best of ways of representing the dark technologies coming from the warp

 

*Facepalm*

 

With that quote, I realised there is no point in trying to convince you that the Chaos Codex is the best codex to represent a Chaos force.

 

 

Surely SM armies should be talked about in the SM forum? Play Silver Skulls, instead.

[Nehekhare]

you know xenith, IW and/or dark mech players like me have converted ad counted-as based on IA-article fluff for years before GW came up with dinobots and turkey.

 

i like my ideas more than what some bloke in the studio who was paid to write a codex he doesn't care about pulls out of his backside to make the deadline.

 

you think otherwise? maybe we're just both entitled to our personal opinion then?

[Iron Warrior w/ Servo Arm]

i like my ideas more than what some bloke in the studio who was paid to write a codex he doesn't care about pulls out of his backside to make the deadline.

 

Agreed

[minionboy]

Good Riddance :)

 

Coming from the guy with 37 total posts... Glad to see you've contributed a ton to warrant that kind of an attitude. :)

 

you know xenith, IW and/or dark mech players like me have converted ad counted-as based on IA-article fluff for years before GW came up with dinobots and turkey.

 

i like my ideas more than what some bloke in the studio who was paid to write a codex he doesn't care about pulls out of his backside to make the deadline.

 

you think otherwise? maybe we're just both entitled to our personal opinion then?

 

Really, what I think it comes down to is that nothing you just said matters. I don't mean that to be rude, but frankly, nothing you said (and quite a few others) contributes in any way on how to effectively use the chaos book.

 

Look, you can either sit here and complain, which seems to be the trend these days, or you can play the book, learn it inside and out, and play the best damn game you can. There are plenty of good things in the book, and it is totally workable to make a good army with. I think it will take time for the tournament scene to find the lists that work (6 months after 6e was released and people are making competitive Tyranids for crying out loud). In the mean time, why don't you actually and contribute your findings to the community, which will speed the process along, instead of complaining on a forum, which will provide literally nothing to the game.

[Hazath]

Good Riddance :)

 

Coming from the guy with 37 total posts... Glad to see you've contributed a ton to warrant that kind of an attitude. :)

 

 

You have 187 posts, you are a big kid now!. I guess I am a less of a man unless I have great numbers of posts. :)

 

He was whining about he was going to leave the forum beacause he tried to explain his opinion but others also had their own opinion.

 

I simply said, a bit rudely which I now apologize, goodbye. ;)

[Rik Riorik]

The thing I find with "counts as" is that the more you do it the less relevant anything becomes. As soon as you step over the "counts as" line you might as well be making stuff up entirely whilst sticking to the rules themselves. As soon as you start making things up like Ultramarines being the kind of Word Bearers you want can't you just make the Word Bearers be the Word Bearers you want? Because in reality nothing is what it is anyways so does it matter?