# 5th ed codex power creep.



## quachill (Apr 29, 2009)

Is it just me or is the power creeping up significantly more from codex to codex than in previous editions of 40K? 
It sure feels like it. 

this thread probably already exists some where in here.


----------



## Lucio (Aug 10, 2009)

I still think SW have more creep than BA from what I've seen. Nids also seem beatable. None of this 15 ML and 4 JotWW in 1k points crap.


----------



## Ascendant (Dec 11, 2008)

While the Space Wolves do seem pretty strictly superior to classic marines, I don't think there's too much creep in general. It's merely that the current codexes are designed for 5th edition rules, and work better in the current environment than the older ones do.


----------



## solkan (Apr 24, 2008)

Saying "There's no codex creep, you're just playing with outdated and poorly supported codices" is a bit like getting told by the doctor "Good news. You don't have lung cancer, you have throat cancer!" uke:


----------



## Viscount Vash (Jan 3, 2007)

solkan said:


> Saying "There's no codex creep, you're just playing with outdated and poorly supported codices" is a bit like getting told by the doctor "Good news. You don't have lung cancer, you have throat cancer!" uke:


Hmm not sure about the two examples you used.

Its more along the lines of ...
_'Good news, athough you chopped your hand of in a horrific Miniature modelling accident, we are working on a way of re attaching it. When? oh we don't know that yet, but we can keep it fresh til we get the tech to pop it back on.'_


----------



## tu_shan82 (Mar 7, 2008)

Viscount Vash said:


> Hmm not sure about the two examples you used.
> 
> Its more along the lines of ...
> _'Good news, athough you chopped your hand of in a horrific Miniature modelling accident, we are working on a way of re attaching it. When? oh we don't know that yet, but we can keep it fresh til we get the tech to pop it back on.'_


Funny stuff Vash, if my sig area wasn't already full that would be going in there. Have some rep though for making me laugh.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

Lucio said:


> None of this 15 ML and 4 JotWW in 1k points crap.


I take it you read my 1k list idea in the SW vs Nids thread then? LOL!:biggrin:


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

I think the "power creep" is over stated a bit by players simply looking at the individual units in the codex and saying "My army doesn't have a 1 to 1 match to that unit/squad." Looking at armies as a whole, rather then their few over powered units seems to balance the scales more.

Even as an SM I can say that the SW codex got a little out of hand with some of their stuff. Looking at the changes from SM to BA though, along with the nids, shows what type of power level GW is going for in the codex.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

The 5th edition Codecies are in my opinion pretty much balanced against one another. Sure, one or two might stand out a bit (like Space Wolves and Imperial Guard) but on the whole the latest edition seems like the most balanced one yet. The 3rd edition books are horrifically outdated and it's a wonder any of them can function at all in the current environment (Dark Eldar and Witch Hunters are two examples of armies that can still hold their own). The few 4th edition books left are in a similar boat to the 3rd edition ones with a few fairing better than others (Chaos and Eldar doing better than say Tau Empire or Black Templars).

Give it a couple years and hopefully we'll see every Codex updated to 5th edition standards and an age of light and balance will come into existence... until GW decides that it's time to publish the 6th edition 40K rules anyway.


----------



## Lucio (Aug 10, 2009)

KingOfCheese said:


> I take it you read my 1k list idea in the SW vs Nids thread then? LOL!:biggrin:


lol you got it.


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

The thing with 'Codex Creep' in my mind is thats its almost inevitable. Simple fact is that making each new codex at least look more awesome then the last with tougher units etc, its a pretty good marketing ploy. 

Your not going to get new players into an army you've only just released or updated easily if they're thinking 'Hmm.. but these guys suck compared to X race'. Hence... 'Codex Creep' earns money by making people want to buy more and branch out.

That and the writers know alot better whats comming then what we do, so some of the thinking of 'Hmm.. X is comming up, if this Y can't defeat there Z unit, the fans will complain lots. Better give them a tougher unit' probably applies too.


----------



## mynameisgrax (Sep 25, 2009)

Sorry, your example reminded me of this:

"I've got good news and bad news. The bad news is: you only have 2 months to live. The good news is: you're pregnant!"

Anyway, codex creep is definitely substantial, but I only think it really matters in the uber competitive settings. In most games, the better player will come out on top, regardless of what army they're using.

I do believe that the Space Wolves are the most powerful army there is right now, but they have less options and versatility than other marine armies. In a way, they're just 'idiot proof'. There's no way to make a bad Space Wolves army. No matter what you use, it'll at least be good. That doesn't mean they're overpowered or unfair.


----------



## Chumbalaya (May 17, 2010)

Wusword77 said:


> I think the "power creep" is over stated a bit by players simply looking at the individual units in the codex and saying "My army doesn't have a 1 to 1 match to that unit/squad." Looking at armies as a whole, rather then their few over powered units seems to balance the scales more.
> 
> Even as an SM I can say that the SW codex got a little out of hand with some of their stuff. Looking at the changes from SM to BA though, along with the nids, shows what type of power level GW is going for in the codex.





Katie Drake said:


> The 5th edition Codecies are in my opinion pretty much balanced against one another. Sure, one or two might stand out a bit (like Space Wolves and Imperial Guard) but on the whole the latest edition seems like the most balanced one yet. The 3rd edition books are horrifically outdated and it's a wonder any of them can function at all in the current environment (Dark Eldar and Witch Hunters are two examples of armies that can still hold their own). The few 4th edition books left are in a similar boat to the 3rd edition ones with a few fairing better than others (Chaos and Eldar doing better than say Tau Empire or Black Templars).
> 
> Give it a couple years and hopefully we'll see every Codex updated to 5th edition standards and an age of light and balance will come into existence... until GW decides that it's time to publish the 6th edition 40K rules anyway.


This and this. There is no creep, just people whining about stuff they're unfamiliar with.


----------



## buckythefly (Mar 16, 2009)

I believe their is a slight creep, like, obviously its just the change in edition rules, I'm so sick of hearing about it though. Like yes, the space wolves are awesome, I have a friend who plays them very competitively. I can still beat him. I've even seen my grey knight playin' buddy do so. some armies just take more work to be competitive. (Hi tau, how are you)

EDIT: personally, I'd go back to 3rd edition orks, waagh checks to go at 6 init. Looted wagons that are actually what they sound like, biker boyz shooting in assault combat....Yeah.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

There is no creep, just a shit load of people screaming "the sky is falling!" If you completely disregard the 4th edition codexes and look only at the 5th edition codexes you will see that no one codex is any more powerful than the last, just different.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

mynameisgrax said:


> I do believe that the Space Wolves are the most powerful army there is right now, but they have less options and versatility than other marine armies. In a way, they're just 'idiot proof'. There's no way to make a bad Space Wolves army. No matter what you use, it'll at least be good. That doesn't mean they're overpowered or unfair.


hmm, so are you calling space wolf players idiots, lol. there are plenty of ways to make a bad SW army, like using lone wolves and skyclaws. you could also make a 260 point wolf lord, that is of little use. you could use an iron priest. i have seen a 1000 point SW army made up of a wolf lord, a 2, 5 man of blood claws with lukas, and thunder hammer SS termies with arjac, all footslogging across the board. if that isnt bad, i dont know what is.


----------



## bakoren (Nov 16, 2009)

My friend freaked out when I showed him the Nid dex (we all went up to the store cause I preordered it). I was showing him all of my new gear, so he was going nuts. After he played two matches with me, he realized that my creatures lost eternal warrior.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

The Tyranid codex was very much a "shock" thing.

People looked at it and said "6W T6 OMFGWTFBBQ!!!!111!!11".
After a month or so though, things settled down and people realised that the codex is fairly tame.

Death Company are the same. People see them as cheaper Khorne Berzerkers with FNP and more special weapons, but dont realize the tactical disadvantage of Rage and not being able to hold objectives making them a much less appealing choice.


----------



## Lord Rahl (Mar 13, 2010)

I think stuff still dies as easy as it did and always has done, its just people being scared of little toy soldiers and not wanting to face stuff coz they are to afraid of whats on the paper and forget about the actuall gaming side of things.


----------



## Vrykolas2k (Jun 10, 2008)

Katie Drake said:


> The 5th edition Codecies are in my opinion pretty much balanced against one another. Sure, one or two might stand out a bit (like Space Wolves and Imperial Guard) but on the whole the latest edition seems like the most balanced one yet. The 3rd edition books are horrifically outdated and it's a wonder any of them can function at all in the current environment (Dark Eldar and Witch Hunters are two examples of armies that can still hold their own). The few 4th edition books left are in a similar boat to the 3rd edition ones with a few fairing better than others (Chaos and Eldar doing better than say Tau Empire or Black Templars).
> 
> Give it a couple years and hopefully we'll see every Codex updated to 5th edition standards and an age of light and balance will come into existence... until GW decides that it's time to publish the 6th edition 40K rules anyway.



I'm pretty sure 5th was in the works when the Eldar codex was written, and I know it was when Chaos came out.
I pretty much consider them both to be 5th edition codices, and doubt they'll be updated.
Now, Chaos did have a grand codex near the beginning of 4th...


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Vrykolas2k said:


> I'm pretty sure 5th was in the works when the Eldar codex was written, and I know it was when Chaos came out.
> I pretty much consider them both to be 5th edition codices, and doubt they'll be updated.
> Now, Chaos did have a grand codex near the beginning of 4th...


In the works is one thing, released and available to the general rule-lawyering, rule twisting power gaming public is another.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

Vrykolas2k said:


> I'm pretty sure 5th was in the works when the Eldar codex was written, and I know it was when Chaos came out.
> I pretty much consider them both to be 5th edition codices, and doubt they'll be updated.
> Now, Chaos did have a grand codex near the beginning of 4th...


Its funny thought that both Eldar and Chaos dont have half the options and amrories that the 5th Ed codexes offer. The Chaos and Eldar have a few options, and downsyndrom gaming rules. nothing stands out at all in ethier these two dexes. yet Eldar and CSM are highly played, and you dont think they wont update 2 cash cows as CSM or Eldar for 5th gaming?


----------

