Chaos Space Marines: Making The Best of a Bad Unit

[Agent Purple]

Yes, we are missing the point here. The thing is that if you can find a synergy that works better for your army or your kind of playstyle, you can customize your csm squad to be in line with the rest of your list. For example, 5-man noise marines with blastmaster combined with csm with ccw or ultra-grit, mos and icon marching forward with rhinos, or you can use huron to infiltrate 20-man close combat marines with flamers, or 20 shooty marines, Even Iron Warrior themed csm with autocannons and combi weapons sound beast. CSM are so unique in abilities and kinds of playstyle that can't be compared with the loyalists in any way imaginable. How you play them on the other hand, makes them a good or a bad unit, not their stat-line nor their cost efficiency.

 

Can't tell if serious...

 

Of course you can compare CSM to other MEQ troops choices.  They generally fill essentailly the same battlefield role - 10 MOK csm with 2pg  is going to be doing the same crap as 10 GH with 2 pg.

 

Chaos also has terrible internal synergy coompared to loyalist dexes. Less BB allies for rule sharing, very few unit interactions. Loyalist books get things like FNP bubbles, quadruple fire rate magic flags, power field generators, wolf standards + terminator squad leader, prescience psykers etc... In comparison, reading the chaos book is like watching kitchen nightmares so much "boring," "bland," and "just dreadful..."

 

Are CSM an unplayable unit? No, having a PA unit squad on an objective and shoot plasma at things dosen't work that much worse than other loyalist marines but they are still far less efficient P for P - so its more like, you take them to meet scoring unit requirements, rather than because they are a good unit you want to build your army around. I especially like how PK gave CSM tons of crappy, inefficient options to choose from to lure new/bad players into making easy mistakes when list building. 

 

It is inherently obvious that if you start building an army using units that is less versatile, resilient, and efficient than equivalent units other codexes have access to, that your army will quickly become on the whole weaker.  The reason you play chaos is because you want FMC and baledrakes, or maybe bike lords.  The only reason you take CSM units is that they are heldrake groupies. It is the CSM that 'support' the real core / workhorses of the army, and not the other way around.  If you wanted to play a powerarmoured-centric army (CSM+havocs+chosen+terminators+raptors/bikes) it is pretty clear to see that simlar lists built with other marine books will be more powerful due to better morale, inter-unit synergy, more cost-efficient price tag, and/or army-wide special rules. 

[minigun762]

First and last warning, keep it civil and constructive or else.

[Elrahir]

I played CSM before the broken flyer, the biker lords and the more cost efficient bikes came into play, i adapted my playstyle on 6th and on 6th ed csm codex, at least how i thought best. How you read or perceive your codex is entirely different on how i do, so you want to tell me that our sorcerers aren't good because we don't have prescience, or our havocs/raptors/terminators are not cost efficient and cannot be made to work into synergy because there is not a squared paragraph in our codex that gives us a synergy rule. SM codex with the synergy rules is supposed to lure new players and give them a mainstream on how to play their armies. CSM codex needs more thinking, i guess? 

Besides taking MoT or the Icon of Nurgle on your regular CSM squad, because i don't know why.. tell me a combination of marks and weaponry that can't work if played right.

 

I know that there should be a more fluff concerned direction to armies ( not just armies, LEGIONS ) that utilized different warfare doctrine, like Night Lords, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors etc.

Let's just hope better supplements will fix this.

[Excessus]

 

So basically what you are saying is that you are better than most other C:CSM players?

 

I am not a good player, but if that makes you happy. YES, i am the best. And you are here just to make that very constructive comment, you've won the internet. Here, take your theoretical money prize.

If your idea was to make me feel insulted you failed, if it was comedy I guess I don't get that kind of humour, sorry...

[Elrahir]

Yes, i care very much how you feel and think, and you were insulting in the first place to begin with. Another day, another constructive comment, another win for you.

This post is getting out of hand, not really does what it says, opinions or ideas on how to play chaos space marines. More like homebrew rules to balance that thing or that one, whining and qq about ATSKNF and other stuff imperialists get, point costs imballances. Nothing genius really or at least food for thought about our CSM squads. And the best of it is backstabing comments by various 'intelligent people' for the cherry on the cake. Is this what chaos players represent?

[Redtoof]

Pretty much. I don't think there is a faction in 40k with more in-character players!

[Fibonacci]

 I don't think there is a faction in 40k with more in-character players!

Maybe Orkz but dem getz ain't allowed 'ere!

[RapatoR]

Ok so analysis of EU meta was posted at BOLS and one comment picked my interest (user Jaakko S. in discussion below article):

 

I calculated for fun from the document that had all the armylists of the event that there were around 70 units of cultists, ~20 plague zombies, around 70 heldrakes and I think ~2 squads of regular chaos marines.

 It seems that CSM tacs are not popular among CSM tournie players.

 

[Ammonius]

I played CSM before the broken flyer, the biker lords and the more cost efficient bikes came into play, i adapted my playstyle on 6th and on 6th ed csm codex, at least how i thought best. How you read or perceive your codex is entirely different on how i do, so you want to tell me that our sorcerers aren't good because we don't have prescience, or our havocs/raptors/terminators are not cost efficient and cannot be made to work into synergy because there is not a squared paragraph in our codex that gives us a synergy rule. SM codex with the synergy rules is supposed to lure new players and give them a mainstream on how to play their armies. CSM codex needs more thinking, i guess? 

Besides taking MoT or the Icon of Nurgle on your regular CSM squad, because i don't know why.. tell me a combination of marks and weaponry that can't work if played right.

 

I know that there should be a more fluff concerned direction to armies ( not just armies, LEGIONS ) that utilized different warfare doctrine, like Night Lords, Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors etc.

Let's just hope better supplements will fix this.

 

I get what you're saying, I just had hoped that what you would say was different.

 

It really seems that the way to "Make the Most" out of the basic CSM unit is to not expect them to do everything, but to balance them out with cultists and allies. Thanks for posting your list, etc.

[oreaper84]

^{I believe that there is a stigma about being a little different, a little worse, a little pricey, like its an unplayable curse. I find it a fact of pride that its tougher to make use of our poster child unit. CSM are not as effecient as the loyalists, no arguments...none. Thats straight fluff, we are cruel, viscous, selfish and havent had updates to training/ equipment. We can still shine though but as was stated earlier our use is not the same as the Tac squad. The Tac squad is an anchor...and a versitile one. Our marines are not intended for this role, unless you give em the icon, but again i do not believe this is thier intended use. Ask a marine player if he didnt wish he had a 4 point unit to sit back and objective camp while the power armour did work. This is WHY the have combat squads. Also we have marks which are amazing (except for Tz but meh). Each has thier role in a list. I love MoS marines, these little gems are amazing in so many ways, throw in a icon and shove em at the enemy as fast as possible, preferably in a squad of 15 or more. Khorne i use in a rhino dump fashion zoom em up and drop off 2-3 squads rapid firing who, if are not destroyed, will charge and smack around most things like a frozen biscuit during hockey season. Even nurg-marines have thier use, i give em plas+auto can and drop em of in area terrain where they can GtG if nessissarry and be quite tough to budge. Now these are tactics that work for me...and i dont drake/bike/oblit spam thought i do use these units in moderation. I play aggressive lists where i get in your face and rapid fire/threaten assault with so much stuff that hopefully there is to much to deal with. I have never been one to complain about the uselessness of units, just played with the marines in different combos till i found how they worked. I dont play sit back and lob dakka armies...im not Tau/Gaurd/Mechdar/Smurfs. I am chaos....}

[RapatoR]

Well I think noone here is considering CSM tacs as worst unit ever. I think it was stresed out in this topic before.

 

Ok I have to admit I am not competetive player so all those subtle nuances of playstyle and synergy are lost on me. But I really don't get why I shouldn't compare two units with practically same stats and gear. If they have same stats and gear, I assume that their roles differ to an extent, that they can't be compared (heck players often compare totally different things just to demostrate something is costly - plasma pistol to marine comparison springs to mind).

 

For me points demostrate how "good" (how effective is/how it performs) a unit is.

If unit A is cheaper as unit B, unit A should be worse, if unit A is more expensive than unit B, then unit A should be better, if unit A costs the same as unit B, both units should be equal.

And this is not an issue connected to CSM exclusively: I don't get why Blood claws are priced same as GH, nor why DA tacs are priced the same as SM tacs and so on.

 

Ok there are other tangential things as ability to buy marks and cultists, but those things are offset by other things (when you buy marks, you will end up getting more expensive than tacs, thus it is natural that your marked CSM are better; SM have more transport options; they are able to be battle brothers to guard and stick a char to a guard blob for ATSKNF and so on. - By this I don't want to say "Hey look what they got i want it too!", but to demostrate that metnioned advantages are easily offset by advantages of other side.)

 

But back to the point. I will break this down to three questions:

1. Why shouln't equally costed units be equally effective?

2. Why shouln't be unit without marks as viable as unit with them? (eg. FW don't need bonding knifes or EMP to make them work, kroots don't need sniper rounds, scouts don't need Camo Cloaks and so on)

3. Why you should need other kind of troop choice to make your first troop choice viabilite/effective? (if you pick tacs, do you need scouts or vice versa? if you pick FW, do you also need kroot or vice versa?)

 

And one additional thing that wasn't really mentioned (it is more of a hobby/background issue): Players who played some kind of "unidivided" CSM in 5th and wanted to represent true grit properly are now stuck with models that are -1ld and cost 1 point more than loyalists.

If (for wathever reason) they don't use marks, they can at least get VotlW and will end up trading +1 ld for ATSKNF and Combat squads + Chapter Tactics for Hatred (Marines) + Truegrit while being 2 pts more than tacticals. Again I fail to see how that can be balanced.

[HJL]

I thought this thread was about making the best out of the unit, 90% of what im reading here is just criticism. Every time some one comes up with a good suggestion to use them, the rest of the community jump down their throats for daring to have hope. All this constant negativity is turning this forum into nothing better than Dakka and Warsear. I know we all have the right to say what we want but complaining constantly because our toy soldiers aren't the best is getting very very old. I do wish the mods would do something about it honestly. :/

[derpasaurus]

I run mine with a tooled up champ (melta bombs, plas pistol, power weapon) 2x plas, rhino, MoS, and ubergrit. if I need points I start with removing ubergrit and go from there. 
They're pretty much amazing. loads of dakka, some serious pewpew to keep terminators and other heavy infantry on their toes, and if the rhinos get lucky they might even survive delivering their payloads. I'm only disappointed in my marines when the plasma gods decide they need some more ashes. One game 4 of my 6 plasma weapons blew up in 2 turns. haha :/

I thought this thread was about making the best out of the unit, 90% of what im reading here is just criticism. Every time some one comes up with a good suggestion to use them, the rest of the community jump down their throats for daring to have hope. All this constant negativity is turning this forum into nothing better than Dakka and Warsear. I know we all have the right to say what we want but complaining constantly because our toy soldiers aren't the best is getting very very old. I do wish the mods would do something about it honestly. :/

I actually stirred the pot quite a bit on this exact issue several months ago. The atmosphere around here can be so incredibly toxic, it kept me away for months. I'm dipping my toes back in slowly again. 

[HJL]

I actually stirred the pot quite a bit on this exact issue several months ago. The atmosphere around here can be so incredibly toxic, it kept me away for months. I'm dipping my toes back in slowly again.

Its really in the hands of the mods, they never seem to do anything about it though unfortunately beyond the minimal plea to keep things on topic.

[Redtoof]

On topic - has anyone made much use out of 5 man units? I've played a few games with 5man plasma gun and combi plas and it's been OK for 100 points. i usually take Huron so they are a handy 2nd or 3rd infiltration unit as they can be hidden fairly easily. Obviously fragile but can pack a comparable punch to a 10 man 2 plas unit for a turn.

[Scribe]

So you want mods to do what, delete opinions that are negative? Its toxic (if it is...I dont find it so) due to dissatisfaction, being voiced. There is nothing wrong with that, we are all big boys playing with plastic (or resin/metal) toys. I think we should be able to handle a bit of criticism. 

[Gumo9]

Agreed. That's why I rarely contribute. Some expert is always ready to jump down your throat.

 

G

[RapatoR]

Well discussion of unit effectiveness and/or critisism are not necessarily bad thing as long as they remain factual and don't go into personal attacks, as we see that GW now might be somehow open to criticism/wishes/feedback from fanbase. Disappearance of character squads, more antiair available in latter 6th ed. dexes, or change to blastmaster for NM serve as a proof.

 

Of course chaos fanbase has yet to undestand the less factual/more whiney criticism gets, the less are GW inclined to listen.

[Severoth]

i usually run 2 squads of 10 with MoN, plasma or melta, Flamer in a rhino. they are my objective holders yet tough fighters if needed. I usually run 1 squad of berserkers with Khârn alongside my marines, 8 bikers MoN, Heldrake, Land Raider(just for the Assaulting Berserkers and Khârn), Havocs with MoN and Autocannons, 5 Terminators MoN and combi meltas. This has been quite devastating and I have yet too loose with it.

[Fibonacci]

I thought this thread was about making the best out of the unit, 90% of what im reading here is just criticism. Every time some one comes up with a good suggestion to use them, the rest of the community jump down their throats for daring to have hope.

I don't think CSM are as bad as the original article makes out.  I don't think they are bad at all.  I DO think they can be made bad.  Part of getting the most out of them is to understand their uses, capitolize on their strength, avoid their weaknesses and build units effecently.  10 marines in a rhino with 2 plasmaguns is a good unit.  Either stay in the box while rapid firing the 2 plasmaguns out of the 2 fireports or hop out and unload with all bolters.  It is effective vs most infantry.  Suicide vs assault terminators.  You need something else for assaults.

 

MoK on the same squad is no help.  Why rapid fire weapons and assault troops don't mix should be obvious. Trying to do two things at once that can not be done together is not getting the most out of the unit; it is wasting points on options that can not be used.  CSM can not generate the amount of AP 3 or AP 2 hits like some of the other options.  MoK can give the unit some added assault bonuses but they will still be swingin at a medium strength and AP - with all those extra swings.  My suguesstion is to use 100 points worth of daemons (bloodletters if you want AP3, daemonettes for Rending) but spawn, maulerfirends or even mutilators would work to get high strength and/or low AP hits. 

 

Use assault units for assaults.  But they can't get across the board on their own.  They need some short to mid ranged shooting support.  Something like 10 CSM in a rhino with 2 plasmaguns works great without blowing too many points on needless upgrades.  Synergy.  Right there in the codex.  What a concept.

[derpasaurus]

So you want mods to do what, delete opinions that are negative? Its toxic (if it is...I dont find it so) due to dissatisfaction, being voiced. There is nothing wrong with that, we are all big boys playing with plastic (or resin/metal) toys. I think we should be able to handle a bit of criticism. 

Well I don't know what you've seen, (or to be honest what's gone on here the last few months, as I've been away) but "shut up and go play spacewolves, they're better in every way anyhow" sounds pretty toxic to me.

 

Criticism, to me, is "maybe you should try Mark of X instead of Y for this situation" or "maybe use this gun instead of that" or "maybe don't spend so many points on a champion who's going to get challenged out anyway, or try a different type of special weapon instead of what you've been doing." not "you're a noob for using this."

 

Please tell me those days are gone.

[derpasaurus]

i usually run 2 squads of 10 with MoN, plasma or melta, Flamer in a rhino. they are my objective holders yet tough fighters if needed. I usually run 1 squad of berserkers with Khârn alongside my marines, 8 bikers MoN, Heldrake, Land Raider(just for the Assaulting Berserkers and Khârn), Havocs with MoN and Autocannons, 5 Terminators MoN and combi meltas. This has been quite devastating and I have yet too loose with it.

That sounds pretty fun. I like MoS because usually I play against MEQ in my area and even if I rapid fire it gives them something to think about, as I generally have VotLW AND go first. Plus plasma overwatch if they assault. 

I've played with nurgle and khorne marks both but I just like that edge of hitting first in combat too much to pass up. I do like to use raptors with khorne, tho. Makes them useful still even if they're assaulted, with counter attack.

[Iron_Within]

So you want mods to do what, delete opinions that are negative? Its toxic (if it is...I dont find it so) due to dissatisfaction, being voiced. There is nothing wrong with that, we are all big boys playing with plastic (or resin/metal) toys. I think we should be able to handle a bit of criticism. 

I think jumping to that conclusion is misleading. Negative toxic post that drag the thread off topic have no place. The important thing for me being they drag things off topic, not that they are negative (that's just an annoying extra, I do wish people would act a little more mature).

 

I've have some good fortune with a 15 man squad with MoS with the Icon of Excess. The unit combines the value of ablative wounds with hitting power. Having the big blob mitigates the cost of Icon (which you jolly well keep hidden as best you can), placing a Lord with a Mark of Slaanesh is a nice force multiplier.

 

I general I think the large blob of 15 is overlooked as we're often slavish to the 10 man squad rule as the most optimum way of milking out special weapons.  I wouldn't try Nurgle in this get up because I think the MoS does it better with the Icon (as well as most importantly having the +1 I). I would certainly try with Khorne though. Infiltrating is always the way to go if you can.

 

Does anyone have any configurations that work particularly well against certain armies? The above Slaanesh blob with Lord with Brand worked well against the SW. With Drop Pods aplenty dropping nearby in an attempt to overwhelm in the typical SW DP tactic this is a nasty counter punch. Even without the Brand and with ubergrit (which I recommend at this size because of the versatility can't be ignored, especially when you're going to be on the defensive).

 

Is there any useful configurations that people find useful against other armies?

[daboarder]

Ok so analysis of EU meta was posted at BOLS and one comment picked my interest (user Jaakko S. in discussion below article):

 

I calculated for fun from the document that had all the armylists of the event that there were around 70 units of cultists, ~20 plague zombies, around 70 heldrakes and I think ~2 squads of regular chaos marines.

 It seems that CSM tacs are not popular among CSM tournie players.

 

 

For teh same reasons I posted there.

 

You cannot use that data in any meaningful way to make a statistical judgement on the health of a codex. It is so biased by the experiment (etc rules) that it is unusable.

[Rayray]

Against Ravenwing, I stick three units in rhinos, with votlw and plasma. They serve as a counter strike to the massive scout move. After that, my Xerxes type army generally pushes forward, centered around those units. I say xerxes because i use cultists, daemon, greater daemons, and characters. But my csm units tend to shine in the role against this articular opponent.