Sanctimonius Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Yeah kinda seems tailor-made for our, you know, eternal warriors with their 10,000 years of warfare experience, but what the hey. SM have everything else, why not this too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevak Dal Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I think we all know that if you could equip tacticals like you can CSMs, that nobody would play Chaos except the die hards. Regarding the Icon of Excess, I basically see that as an Apothecary upgrade on a stick, I just wish it (and the other marks) weren't locked into Marks. That and I wish the fear one affected Space Marines, and the Flame one also caused flaming CC attacks, or AP5 in close combat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FashaTheDog Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Well there is the disadvantage of being the first 6th edition codex out, so GW had time to see and hear about what works and what does not so that when the Ultrasmurfs were in line, they could learn the lessons and reap the benefits. Until a supplement comes out that helps Chaos (perhaps the Iron Warriors will take a note from the loyalist scum and grant free special rules, not holding my breath though) we just have to think of the difference as our "not a Mary Sue tax." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scribe Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Well there is the disadvantage of being the first 6th edition codex out, so GW had time to see and hear about what works and what does not so that when the Ultrasmurfs were in line, they could learn the lessons and reap the benefits. Until a supplement comes out that helps Chaos (perhaps the Iron Warriors will take a note from the loyalist scum and grant free special rules, not holding my breath though) we just have to think of the difference as our "not a Mary Sue tax." There is absolutely no way thats true. I would be dumb founded and forever mute if GW claimed that 'we saw how CSM players felt, so we fixed all the other books that came after' I would LITERALLY :cuss a brick. I agree that we have egregriously wronged with the way 6th has been shaping up, everyone else has got our perks for next to nothing except for the Heldrake which I think everyone would agree to tone down or do away with in exchange for a more internally and externally balanced codex full of the flavor we have been wanting for 2 editions. How do we get in touch of someone in a position? Gav's no longer in the team, Jervis has never answered my polite and concise snail mail, Phil deleted his facebook. The only thing I can think of otherwise is having A-D-B sympathize with us, but considering there isn't any crossover between the library and the design team I have a feeling we are up **** creek without a paddle. It honestly makes me wonder why no one in the design team appreciates chaos space marines, Daemons got a huge boost in flavor, options and power but here we are with a revised 4th edition codex in 6th edition. It feels archaic and at end's with itself, the only army book that punishes your ability to synergize your army. It really leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and I often wonder why this discussion never comes up at gamesday when there are literally hundreds of people there to ask the design team. This is what I want to know. Why is there no champion for CSM in the studio, because a Warriors of Chaos Fantasy concept rehash, + Gav's and Alessio's 'Great Work' does not a 6th Edition Codex make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FashaTheDog Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I was just saying it seems like a repeat of the prior Dark Angels codex where they took the good things from it, fixed a few bad things, and called it the following Ultramarine Codex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scribe Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 The speed of releases right now feels (yes, I know feelings matter not 1 bit) like that just wouldnt work, the time between design and ship is too short. Then again, its been a year or so right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dravenguild Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Well I have wrote another letter and emailed the FAQ team so maybe I'll get a response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scribe Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I really just would love to know what the vision they had for the book was. I cant get phil's comment of carrying on from Gav's 'great work' out of my head. Its a fixation. I know what Chaos could be. I know what I want it to be. This book though, it makes every effort to drive me insane. I've settled on Heldrake (Single) and 2 Maulerfiends, supported by 2 Tzeentch Daemons (LoC + DP) as the true core of my army, with 2 x 10 CSM, and a Black Legion Lord leading them. I dont want to dance around as a finesse army (Oblits are simply not rock hard, and most of our troops evaporate under pressure) and so am just going to hurtle towards my opponent with every intention of smashing myself against them hoping they break first. Is this what was envisioned? Look at our stock HQ's of choice. DP with Mace, a beat stick, nothing more. Jugger Lord, with Axe, another beat stick. Nurgle Biker Lord, Brand Slaanesh Biker Lord, Brand Those two dont even want to be in CC, because they likely run with bikers, and simply are not that good in CC, which historically was a focal point of CSM. Outside those common options? Huron, to give us at least a glimmer of deployment options outside of 'Drive up', 'Sit on your hands in reserve' or 'Walk forward and eat bolters'. I feel this is getting into a rant, and I dont really care to do that right now but really. What is this book. What was its design philosophy, what was the vision behind it, because other then the Drake before AA caught up (and Eldar/Tau have done it) there was no hook. Daemon Engines? Its sure as :cuss not Legions, or even Renegades, or Cultists, or a combination as disjointed as that could be, and is. Smash something in the face, with overwhelming pressure, if you can get there, really seems to be about it. Oh, and between Noise Marines, Brand, and Heldrakes, we can bring plenty of Ignore Cover AP3....but then get shot off the board by real shooting armies... *deep breaths* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daboarder Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 the design philosophy was minimum effort for maximum gain. ie add a few new dual kit units, adjust some points costs and release the old dex for a fraction of the effort required to give chaos the reboot its book needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darknightdrako Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 My crazy answers: GW is just afraid to make CSM better than SM because it will hurt SM sales. On a serious note though, During the C:CSM 3.5 era did CSM actually out sell SM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhukov Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Yes Space Marines roll over Chaos Space Marines, but also over Dark Angels. Basicly, codex creep generally simply exists, I'm afraid that the truth. Because all Marine codices look like eachother, this means codices being released the earliest, are generally the weakest. It holds less true for non-marines as GW isn't as good at balancing non-marines, they Always have the chance of having something ridiculous overpowered which carries over to other editions and as it's often something no other codex has... well, they might just be competitive for a long time. (I knew this would happen with Tau for example, the previous codex had some little flaws, but was not nearly as bad as most people believed it to be) 6th: Seems to hold true, Space Marines are stronger than CSM and DA. (And also stronger than the 5th edition BA, SW and GK codices, although GK hardly qualify as a marine codex due to them being truly very different. 5th: Seems to hold true. Generally SW, BA and GK were stronger than DA, BT, Marines and CSM. The latter 4 are being older. Is it fair? I find that question not so relevant, it's the way it is. As I see it, there are 3 global options for players: 1. You don't care about being competitive and thus you don't need one of the best codices at a given time. Good, enjoy yourself, don't waste your energy on negative emotions, wont help you. 2. You are competitive and have the money to support this: You will probably be switching armies about 3 times a year. You will Always be playing with one of the stronger codices at a given time. 3. You are competitive but don't have the money to support this: The group which is F-worded. These either leave the game or complain for years on forums about how unfair GW is. I pitty these and not in a mean way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daboarder Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 CSM outsold EVERYONE during 3.5, they were bigger then than space marines are now. I remember all the codex jumpers back then trying to justify why their "renegade" chapters weren't really chaos marines but were still excommunicated. and then there were the hardcore chaos followers that embraced the dark gods. I know a bloke who had 3 different armies that played completely uniquely out of that book. And there were more you could have done. zhukov, there is no WAY space marines are stronger than GK's, par for the course sure, but not stronger. And how about option 4, I don't need to be competative but I'd like to play a proper legion list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhukov Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 daboarder, on 10 Sept 2013 - 09:41, said: daboarder, on 10 Sept 2013 - 09:41, said: zhukov, there is no WAY space marines are stronger than GK's, par for the course sure, but not stronger. Disagree, but this is not the place to discuss it. Nor does it matter for what I said in my post, even if you are right. (You aren't, PM me if you need to know why) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenebris Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Well lets be truthful. The 3.5 CSM was a beast of a codex. Powerful, with ceramite balls and with the rules to back up the fluff, too bad that it was overpowered which set the bar for that edition. We are still paying for its godlike power with our meager rules. I would add a 5th category. The Veteran Player, one who has seen all, done all and probably has around four armies at his disposal so neither money or games matter but a good book does. Some, I presume most of the CSM players still loyal to this faction come from the ranks of the 3.5 chaos marines while some were unfortunate enough to jump on the shiny new codex when CSM came out a year ago. But the Veteran is probably somewhere inbetween and has the options to switch books and armies thus it can be nagging when you loose such valuable players due to bad rules. Now lets tone down a bit. Sure we have a lackluster (i love this word, thanks to B&C where I learned it) book and most of our units seem to be subpar, sure they are but they are not to completely write off. What nags me is that we have to rely on the Helldrake yet there is still a glimmer of hope. I have begun to integrate my armies with daemons and sad but true they make us so much better. In the end, we suffer from the first codex syndrome, we can not expect the supplements to be good for the base rules upon which the supplements are built are not good but we can expect to still have a kick and we are Chaos Space Marines, bitterness is the very fibre of our body and soul, we hate, our marines hate and we should fight with viciousness, hatered and cruelty if we cannot fight with shiny rules. Joke aside, we still have a fighting chance, know that the DA were hit harder than we with the new SM book, it is like GW spit into their green helmets, while we can complain but we should not now not ever aspire to be "like" the SM. They have army wide rules for otherwise the plain marines are a boring army to play, they needed diversity while even now straight from our book we can build four different legions, renegade warbands, funky machines and so much more. Granted, they do not work in concert as the SM do, this is our main disadvantage yet we still can claim some sort of diversity and the friends in my club dread my armies for each tournaments and campaign I surprise them with a different army template. Completely unpredictable, completely legit and at least fun, even if I do not win often for even a good general can do only so much with scarce troops. So raise your spirits and start to play with the full plethora of units and different army templates that the CSM can bring to the table. Sure this requires a vast collection yet it is entirely possible to achieve the same with only the bare minimum, even just by switching the marks and the icons if need be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I have begun to integrate my armies with daemons and sad but true they make us so much better. be weary of this path. Soon you may end up playing demon main csm ally . As far as DA goes[i know kind of a not the place] to make them good , one has to forget that one plays DAs. Mass IG or SW ally realy make the army shine. No of that I play RW/DW/Greenwing stuff . Simple going after a power build works for them . Harder to play then other armies , but lacking chaos "I could be playing demons/Helldrake doesn't work , my opponent was ready for it". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verythrax Draconis Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I don't have the BRB here, so can someone tell me the ally chart about CSM and DA? Are they completely and utterly impossible to ally? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fibonacci Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 http://i.imgur.com/MY4Mo.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verythrax Draconis Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 http://i.imgur.com/MY4Mo.jpg Thanks, too bad. it would help to make my Fallen Angels force more attractive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkagl Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I think I woulda have been ok with 2 things like Malisteen said more eternal warrior. Also why not just give marks of chaos for free. If SM get traits and Daemons auto have the marks. Why not make it just like the latest C:SM and make it CSM armies have to take one mark and if you want another mark then they have to be allies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verythrax Draconis Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I think I woulda have been ok with 2 things like Malisteen said more eternal warrior. Also why not just give marks of chaos for free. If SM get traits and Daemons auto have the marks. Why not make it just like the latest C:SM and make it CSM armies have to take one mark and if you want another mark then they have to be allies. Another thing that I don't get it is Chaos Undivided as a mark. It's not like you pledge alliance something that gives you undivided power, since such entity doesn't exist. Undivided should be the vanilla, since they are actually avoiding actively to support an specific chaos force. Another cool thing that malice could be a "mark" as well and expand the CSM possibilities according to the fluff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arkagl Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Mark of Undivided doesn't mean you have nothing to pledge to it means that you pledge to all the Chaos God rather than one specific and in return all of them give you a little extra. Malice from what I read has some copyright rules to it thats why we don't see it as much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verythrax Draconis Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Mark of Undivided doesn't mean you have nothing to pledge to it means that you pledge to all the Chaos God rather than one specific and in return all of them give you a little extra. Malice from what I read has some copyright rules to it thats why we don't see it as much. You give to all of them, but there's not an entity composed of a bit of each god to grant blessing and powers, anyway. And Malice is ok, Malal, the original name is what had issues and that's why it is known as Malice now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zyl- Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I have begun to integrate my armies with daemons and sad but true they make us so much better. be weary of this path. Soon you may end up playing demon main csm ally . This is just too attractive, as it avoids the warp storm table. With heralds being the currency, we can still take 4 HQ choices and narrow it down to the most broken things for allies. It is a sacrifice since you have to rely on CSM a little more, but you can fit a whole lot of what you want into an allies detatchment with daemons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scribe Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 I dont think you get the 4 heralds, I thought there as mention of 'primary detachment' or some such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zyl- Posted September 11, 2013 Share Posted September 11, 2013 The book doesn't specify that said primary detatchment need be from that particular codex. Until it is FAQ'd (which won't be for the next year at the current pace) that is how I interpret their poor design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.