CSM Goonhammer Articles Updated

[Khornestar]

Useful IMO, as I’m learning 9th in greater detail and these articles contain a lot of good information:

 

https://www.goonhammer.com/start-competing-chaos-space-marines-updated-3/

 

Edit: locking to put this in the resources thread.

Edited August 6, 2021 by Juggernut

[MegaVolt87]

Useful IMO, as I’m learning 9th in greater detail and these articles contain a lot of good information:

 

https://www.goonhammer.com/start-competing-chaos-space-marines-updated-3/

 

Edit: locking to put this in the resources thread.

 

Hm, bit off IMO. Our shooting being mainly at 24-36 isn't much of a disadvantage with new board sizes. I disagree with our overall shooting rated low/ weak I would put it at medium its got mileage.  MSU raptors with specials, chosen and bikes specials stacked especially with plasma guns which CSM can take a stupid number of do the job. Talking about a shooting gap we don't really have for D2/ good AP. No mention of the laser destroyer Spartan which is a good pick for us still. I read this as, our edge is circumventing certain 9th design such as core keeping us relevant, propped up by FW units and about a quarter of our codex is playable. So- exactly where we were in 8th ed. Funny how the tourny guys are saying the same things as the non tourny competitive vets playing since 3rd ed. I feel like they basically copy pasta right here from the B&C months ago when we already worked all this out before. I can't take another rubbish CSM dex for 9th ed, I would rather just get the EC and WE codexes for 9th ed and a CSM dex in 10th ed on when GW decide to pull it out and give us a competitive codex like SM. Yeah I'm mad, I had to vent.   GW and their darling factions while   in our Khorneflakes to spite us. 

[Khornestar]

I get it, frater. My frustration takes form of just constantly getting stoked about the minis and hobby aspect, then wanting to put them on the table, and facing the reality of how bad a lackluster 8th edition codex fares against current books.

 

That being said, I think these articles are hyper focused on “competitive” lists and skewed for the most efficient choices and such. I more or less do buy it. We don’t see most units in our roster represented in these games at all because they’re just super inefficient in the modern game. They may have misread a few things here and there but I think their analysis is generally useful. Mileage may vary, of course.