No CSM codex in 2021

[Bulwyf]

They release this news on the exact day a year ago they promised CSM players would get the extra wound. We are still waiting for that and have been told to wait another year for our codex. They release editions on a 3 year window. It means CSM players will have been effectively worthless for a minimum two out of three years for 9th edition. Unreal. 

[Halandaar]

It means CSM players will have been effectively worthless

 

No need to be so hard on yourself 

 

Anyway look, somebody has to be first and somebody has to be last, every single time. CSM are often early in the Codex cycle and then get quickly overtaken as more Codexes come out and the power creep starts setting in.

 

I do think it was a really bad decision by GW not to patch in the 2 wounds via FAQ right at the beginning, but it is what it is. This time at least, by virtue of being one of the later Codexes, there is a good chance CSM will be actually competitive for the rest of the edition and in to the next one, which has not always been the case previously.

[WarriorFish]

As Halandaar says CSM might do well being one of the later ones out of the door, plus as the rumours from today hint no small change may be coming for Chaos Marines. If this is true, and it has a decent source, then it'll be a very busy time for Chaos forces, and if WE and EC codices come too all the more so if they get a few new kits also. If so I can see why GW may want to get their ducks in a row and run them out together as much as I want an update sooner.

Edited August 14, 2021 by WarriorFish

[Relentless]

I dont really buy the "releasing late means CSM will benefit from power creep" argument because we'll finally have parity for about 6 months before Space Marines 2.0 will come out

[Bulwyf]

I have zero point zero faith in GW doing anything right by CSM. CSM has been one of the worst performing armies since the 3.5 codex. That was a very long time ago. GW could simply FAQ the extra wound at any time over the last YEAR and refuse to do so. 

[betrayer41]

We do get multiple Traitor Astartes Next year though... Could be glorious

[Bulwyf]

We do get multiple Traitor Astartes Next year though... Could be glorious

 

I will honestly only believe it when I see it. GW has been absolutely terrible with CSM for many years now.  They don't get the benefit of the doubt.

I dont really buy the "releasing late means CSM will benefit from power creep" argument because we'll finally have parity for about 6 months before Space Marines 2.0 will come out

 

I can actually see something like this from GW: "After watching the power creep in earlier editions we proactively toned down the new CSM codex to keep this from occurring yet again in this edition's cycle."

[Iron Father Ferrum]

It's rare that they pull back from creep with new releases; their model seems to be "let the OP stuff hit the table, then issue FAQ later to correct the problem."

 

You're doom & glooming for no reason. We've been fighting the Long War for 10,000 years; we can be patient for one more without losing our heads.

[Marshal Loss]

I was expecting this, so I'm not surprised. The silver lining to this which I've been saying for quite some time now is that CSM getting held back likely indicates a big release. Not guaranteed, but if I were a betting man, I'd bet on it.

 

That being said, CSM being left with one wound for well over a year when a simple FAQ could fix things is absolutely indefensible. Why DA got a PDF to hold them over for a few months while we're left in the cold for 12 months+, I don't know.

[SanguinaryGuardsman]

I was expecting this, so I'm not surprised. The silver lining to this which I've been saying for quite some time now is that CSM getting held back likely indicates a big release. Not guaranteed, but if I were a betting man, I'd bet on it.

 

That being said, CSM being left with one wound for well over a year when a simple FAQ could fix things is absolutely indefensible. Why DA got a PDF to hold them over for a few months while we're left in the cold for 12 months+, I don't know.

Just channel this hatred into painting or let it build up and unleash it when the codex arrives.  Both the chaos books released so far are excellent.  No reason to think this trend won't continue.  

[Marshal Loss]

If the CSM book is of equivalent quality to the DG one (I haven't looked at the TS one properly yet as I don't play them), I'd be thrilled. Faith & Fury showed that GW can do good rules for the Traitor Legions, but they've screwed us so many times before, and 9th edition books have been pretty inconsistent in terms of their power, so "no reason to think this trend won't continue" is a bit optimistic for my tastes.

 

Hopefully this pans out:

 

[WrathOfTheLion]

I expect that we'll have to wait. It's unfortunate, but I've kind of known it would be like this for a while. Eldar and CSM are almost certainly up to bat for some new releases, which is why they have been delayed so much.

In the meantime, I'm just working on some painting, as I've started on some Black Legion as another force besides the Word Bearers. I may try to finish up some Death Guard from Dark Imperium and start playing with those for now.

[SanguinaryGuardsman]

If the CSM book is of equivalent quality to the DG one (I haven't looked at the TS one properly yet as I don't play them), I'd be thrilled. Faith & Fury showed that GW can do good rules for the Traitor Legions, but they've screwed us so many times before, and 9th edition books have been pretty inconsistent in terms of their power, so "no reason to think this trend won't continue" is a bit optimistic for my tastes.

 

Hopefully this pans out:

 

Aside from admech/dark eldar all the books are well balanced.  GW just needs to tone down the stacking rules of admech and raise the points of every single dark eldar unit by 20% and we are golden.  

[Marshal Loss]

Aside from admech/dark eldar all the books are well balanced.  GW just needs to tone down the stacking rules of admech and raise the points of every single dark eldar unit by 20% and we are golden. 

Many of the earlier books (e.g. Necrons, BA, DW) have dropped off dramatically and simply aren't on par with later books. Others are well-balanced (DG, Sisters, Orks to an extent) while others contain some of the most ludicrous content published in recent memory (Mechanicus, Dark Eldar). GK & TS are too new to judge. You are welcome to your optimism, but I've been playing CSM for too many years to fall prey to "well most of the books this edition are fine, so we're going to get a good one too". Time will tell.

[SanguinaryGuardsman]

 

Aside from admech/dark eldar all the books are well balanced.  GW just needs to tone down the stacking rules of admech and raise the points of every single dark eldar unit by 20% and we are golden. 

Many of the earlier books (e.g. Necrons, BA, DW) have dropped off dramatically and simply aren't on par with later books. Others are well-balanced (DG, Sisters, Orks to an extent) while others contain some of the most ludicrous content published in recent memory (Mechanicus, Dark Eldar). GK & TS are too new to judge. You are welcome to your optimism, but I've been playing CSM for too many years to fall prey to "well most of the books this edition are fine, so we're going to get a good one too". Time will tell.

 

Perhaps but all armies have had some success in 9th at various points and no codex is bland or lame which was the case for quite a few books in 8th.  All the books in 9th have a very high baseline quality to them even if they aren't blowing up the top tables at events that only a fraction of 40k players attend anyways.  

[Marshal Loss]

and no codex is bland or lame

That's your perspective, one fans of numerous factions would strongly disagree with. This opinion is heavily skewed by the fact that the baseline power of 9th edition books is significantly higher than what we had in 8th by default, meaning that early releases (e.g. Necrons, BA, DW, etc) only experienced initial success because they weren't competing on a level playing field. Less than a year later some of these armies are now staring down the barrel of an edition that is deeply hostile to them in both competitive and non-competitive contexts.

 

Mileage will vary depending on one's local scene, but "there's no reason to think this trend won't continue" is completely ignorant of GW's inherently inconsistent approach to rules writing and releases, and I say this as somebody who thoroughly enjoys 9th. This is the same company which playtested every book at the same time and then added in things like D3+3 Dark Lances after finishing playtesting.

 

You're welcome to your optimism and I don't see much point in engaging further, but frankly I think anybody proclaiming that there's no reason not to be optimistic about a CSM codex after the last c. 19 years is, to put it mildly, getting ahead of themselves.

[Cerberus1775]

Strong codex or not for CSM wont really matter to me.  My dice will be rotten anyway.

 

I realize as a new player my opinion matters none at all.  However we will get the rules we get and I look forward to the challenge of making them work.   The rest I cant control, so I will return to my painting now.

[Hathor42]

Eww I don't like that ratio of 4 chaos marine units to 6 mortals. I want marines not the bullet sponges. 

[Maschinenpriester]

I am pretty sad about the dilamma not having an official playable army for a while as well. All I think I can do is having friendly games and housrule the second wound. I did that in the past. And with the traits not being that good, it barely made a difference against some foes.

I am just happy I have started sisters in 2019 and have another army to play right now.

Edited August 14, 2021 by Maschinenpriester

[Lucerne]

Eww I don't like that ratio of 4 chaos marine units to 6 mortals. I want marines not the bullet sponges. 

You can still run a horde of power armor even if more fluffy units get models. Just buy chosen if you really want to run an unfluffy power armor spam list lol.

 

The rumored updates are very exciting.

Edited August 14, 2021 by Lucerne

[SanguinaryGuardsman]

 

and no codex is bland or lame

That's your perspective, one fans of numerous factions would strongly disagree with. This opinion is heavily skewed by the fact that the baseline power of 9th edition books is significantly higher than what we had in 8th by default, meaning that early releases (e.g. Necrons, BA, DW, etc) only experienced initial success because they weren't competing on a level playing field. Less than a year later some of these armies are now staring down the barrel of an edition that is deeply hostile to them in both competitive and non-competitive contexts.

 

Mileage will vary depending on one's local scene, but "there's no reason to think this trend won't continue" is completely ignorant of GW's inherently inconsistent approach to rules writing and releases, and I say this as somebody who thoroughly enjoys 9th. This is the same company which playtested every book at the same time and then added in things like D3+3 Dark Lances after finishing playtesting.

 

You're welcome to your optimism and I don't see much point in engaging further, but frankly I think anybody proclaiming that there's no reason not to be optimistic about a CSM codex after the last c. 19 years is, to put it mildly, getting ahead of themselves.

 

This a post worthy of reddit.  

[Jings]

 

 

and no codex is bland or lame

That's your perspective, one fans of numerous factions would strongly disagree with. This opinion is heavily skewed by the fact that the baseline power of 9th edition books is significantly higher than what we had in 8th by default, meaning that early releases (e.g. Necrons, BA, DW, etc) only experienced initial success because they weren't competing on a level playing field. Less than a year later some of these armies are now staring down the barrel of an edition that is deeply hostile to them in both competitive and non-competitive contexts.

 

Mileage will vary depending on one's local scene, but "there's no reason to think this trend won't continue" is completely ignorant of GW's inherently inconsistent approach to rules writing and releases, and I say this as somebody who thoroughly enjoys 9th. This is the same company which playtested every book at the same time and then added in things like D3+3 Dark Lances after finishing playtesting.

 

You're welcome to your optimism and I don't see much point in engaging further, but frankly I think anybody proclaiming that there's no reason not to be optimistic about a CSM codex after the last c. 19 years is, to put it mildly, getting ahead of themselves.

 

This a post worthy of reddit.  

 

 

Is he wrong though? They released an updated CSM Codex alongside an updated Space Marine one a couple years back and all they did was add a few datasheets, while the Space Marine one completely updated all faction rules to the point it's closer to the current dex than the one prior. It was a complete and utter pisstake. 

 

We're a complete NPC faction right now. I haven't even thought about arranging a game since lockdown started to lift because of it and frankly, the fact we've been left unerrata'd for over a year now has almost completely killed all drive I have for the hobby. I haven't spent a penny on official 40K kits since November because I've been waiting for this, and at this point I can't see myself doing it again. 

[BrainFireBob]

There is a common Chaos problem here.

 

Compare us to Eldar or Guard or Sisters or Orks. Not SMs. We're cock-of-the-walk in terms of support (frequency)

 

Edit: In answer to your question, he's half right. There's now enough precedent (recent codex trends) for optimism, but also (longterm) for pessimism.

Edited August 14, 2021 by BrainFireBob

[Marshal Loss]

Edit: In answer to your question, he's half right. There's now enough precedent (recent codex trends) for optimism, but also (longterm) for pessimism.

There's no "half" about it. I never said that there wasn't any justification for optimism. From the beginning, I was responding to this quote, which is why I focused on the negatives:

 

Both the chaos books released so far are excellent.  No reason to think this trend won't continue. 

 

GW has an inherently inconsistent approach to rules writing. Relatively little oversight, outsourced playtesters that don't always get to provide feedback on the final version of the book, and a design team that writes books individually - all of these variables mean that trends can and do change at the drop of a hat, especially in an era that is unusually attuned to the whims and desires of the competitive scene. The CSM book may have been written by a different author to the person(s) who did DG & TS, massive changes may be made (again) without consulting the playtesters, data received from competitive players may change their original plan (e.g. GW decide that the DG book was too strong, and tune down CSM), directives may come from above...you get the idea.

 

We're borderline guaranteed to get gorgeous models. We're guaranteed to get stat changes like 2W marines and WS3/BS3 Daemon Engines. If the CSM book has the character and the internal/external balance of the DG book, I'll be thrilled. But let's be frank: CSM fans have been consistently burned by GW. For every success like Faith & Fury there's an 8.5 codex, or a 7th ed Traitor Legions supplement that lasts only 6 months, or the long wait for 2W CSM that could be fixed by a simple FAQ. Some of these issues are due to GW's treatment of CSM specifically, others are simply due to how they choose to monetize rules content. Both are problematic.

 

The issue as I see it has never been the frequency of our support. It has been the quality. GW has in the past not looked to give CSM fans what they wanted. There are some promising signs that the 9th edition CSM book will smash it out of the park. If people feel optimistic, that's great. But I'm not going to assume that the book will be great just because DG (& possibly TS) are good books. As I said above: time will tell.

[Doctor Perils]

Another counter to power creep being an inevitability with GW's approach to faction updates is AoS's recent battletomes (for 2nd ed) which varied so greatly in terms of quality of design (both in power and flavour) that people on AoS forums have a conspiracy theory of a "bin guy" and "sin guy".

See for example the release of Hedonites of Slaanesh on the same day as Daughters of Khaine