# Why can't Games Workshop seem to win with CSM players?



## Iron_Freak220 (Nov 8, 2009)

It seems like everything Games Workshop does in regards to Chaos Space Marines turns out to disappoint a large majority of CSM players. The last three codecies were an upset to many, even the new Black Legion supplement which isn't even out yet is already disappointing people. I'm curious as to why people think that is.

Now don't get me wrong, I am also one of those disappointed people. I feel like there could have been so much more creative potential in Chaos Space Marines than there is. 

I'm wondering though, do people think that it's more GW's fault in not putting enough visible effort into CSMs or more of the players fault for always wanting what they don't have?

PS I personally think its not that GW doesn't put in the effort but that they deliberately don't. I feel like CSM's are released early as a 'test' codex for new editions. CSM gets released and then a wave of obviously more powerful codecies gets released after. We get to be the trial for rules like the Warp Talons Blind affects. It was pretty weak so it got boosted in Tau and Eldar. I think CSM is kind of GW's tester/bitch and never really gets the love it deserves.

PSS Anyone can say CSM is strong when played by a smart general, etc but you still can't deny the huge disappointments that only seem to follow Chaos Space Marine releases.


----------



## locustgate (Dec 6, 2009)

Iron_Freak220 said:


> Stuff


I think people aren't happy with CSM cause they are the test dex and most chaos players are.....chaotic. Like most tau players are nerds/tech geeks, Smurfs 12 year old boys or roman fans, crons nerds with a bit of goth tendencies, nids people that play way to much Starcraft, and orks pyros/gear heads. Note results may vary and derived from personal experience.

Edit: Forgot IG, mostly WW fans.


----------



## Hydraulix (May 5, 2013)

lol Locustgate I loved how you summed that up lol perfect


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord (Apr 17, 2009)

I think it's a combination of:
1) Losing all the variability and flavour of the older chaos 'dexes (3.5). The forces of chaos are made up of thousands and thousands of different warbands and factions, each approaching warfare differently. I know it frustrates me not being able to represent all those different aspects effectively on the table.
2) Shitty rules and point costing.
3) Seeing the space marines time and time again get way cooler and more variable stuff. The space marines are part of a stagnant, ultra religious, by the books regime, and yet they have a much greater capacity to make 'unique' armies.
4) To a lesser extent; people like to complain.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

Personally; I feel that Chaos lost from being a little of the "guinea pig" syndrome a little too much (4th and 6th)

Also the current codex IMO lost out on several potential models to release/re-release; Cult units desperately need new boxes, Cultists in a 10man box with actual new poses, a Cult unit dedicated transport (half-track personally - effectively an open topped chimera) those are the top 3 in my book.

I would say CRCL is right in order of 4, 2, 1.


----------



## SonofVulkan (Apr 14, 2010)

I was disappointed with the Codex because it didn't have any Legion specific rules. I think the Chaos Legions are far more interesting and diverse than the loyal chapters, but this can't be truly represented on the field of battle. But with the Codex supplements coming out, there is some hope.

"Iron Within, Iron Without (any specific rules)."


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Someone else put it best, but fundamentally I think Chaos has too many "Holy Cows". Things that developers refuse to touch "because that's how it is".

Perfect example, the Chaos Land Raider. It's been a joke more or less since they gained access to it in 3.5 - more expensive than a Smurf one and with none of the special rules. As Marines also gained access to the Redeemer and Crusader (with no concurrent gains on the part of Chaos) it's just made it even worse.

Now it'd be an easy fix. Simply equalize the points and give the Chaos ones "Power of the Daemon Spirit", or alternatively drop the points of the Chaos one by ~30. Job done. However if you truly wanted to make Chaos feel special, you'd give them a Land Raider that loyalists don't (and will never) have access to. Since we already have a Jack-of-all trades, a template spam, and a torrent build for the Land Raider, the next logical step is "single big fuck off cannon" so it'd be something like the Achilles with reduced (or removed) transport capacity in order to mount something akin to a Battle Cannon in addition to the sponsons.

So that's a single example of a really easy way to fix a small part of the Chaos Codex. But they won't do it. Either because "that's the way it's always been" or because they're too lazy to actually do more than copy/paste the entry without actually thinking about it.

To that list you can add: Cult Troops as Elites, Conflicting Marks, No Razorbacks/Drop Pods et al.

I suppose what pisses Chaos players off the most (or it would, if I played them) is when something has no basis in either rules or fluff, with the drop pod being case in point. Legions were using them pre-heresy for hundreds of years. Each Legion had thousands of them at their disposal. Rules-wise there is nothing broken about Chaos with access to Drop Pods any more than Drop-Wolves or Deathwing Assault. Yet they can't have them.

The fact that the codex writers seem catagorically unable to point-value things correctly for them is strange, but true. Not sure why, but they are historically a very bad codex for efficiency.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

when i listen to the gripes it always feels like what ever Chaos codex comes out it doesnt match up to the expectations of the Chaos player because of how he sees his version of a"chaos" army, there always seems to be a lack of something or not able to do something he feels is a given or he can field his army but hes had to make it fit the codex rather than the codex giving him access to what he considers his chaos given right to field (not sure that makes sense but hey im going with it) or that another codex is a better match for his chosen legion/warband.

realistically the chaos codex should be massive and all encompassing, it should have the variety to field almost anything that can be corrupted by chaos or is willing to fight for the cause either mortal or supernatural, it should have enough scope to field only legions from the HH era right the way to the current point in time and warbands who have just deserted for chaos, the very fact that certain vanilla loyalist units are not available to chaos marines is totally metal and makes very little business sense when you consider the potential sales, it should have pure cultist/chaos guard armies and even other non human cultists like corrupted orks/tau.

Now we might see steps in that direction with the advent of supplements and that might win over the chaos players.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Biggest gripe I hear when you actually listen to the whiny little fucks who play chaos, is the amount of tables they now roll on, determine helmet horn size, determine number of tubes in neck, determine size of cloak


----------



## Bayonet (Aug 13, 2010)

*Dons Helmet*

I actually like the 'Dex, sure it could be better - but it works just fine for me. I also have something that Loyalist Marines don't have - Big fuck off daemon engines and a Space Dragon that breathes metric fuck tons of rage inducing fire.

Cultists were also a welcome addition, I've now got a horde meatshield that absorbs bullets for me whilst my Word Bearers advance behind them.


----------



## Ravner298 (Jun 3, 2011)

Guinea pig syndrome, again. Blatantly obvious choices that need to be spammed to be competitive, again (from oblits to drakes). GW telling us that legion rules in 1 book would be impossible, and then doing it for SM. Our only assault vehicle is an overpriced role-confused land raider. No drop pods, as mentioned (even though it makes perfect sense for them to have). Generally overcosted units/upgrades. Being immensely weaker than books like eldar and tau, with less flavor to boot. Waiting years for a book for our only competitive option to be just a sorcerer, cultist, heldrake ally detachment in a better army. Extremely bad black legion supplement, unless you love black crusade fluff. Zero daemon weapons outside of one that requires mark of khorne. The champion of chaos rule alot of people don't like as well, especial when compared to other things like supporting fire and the eldar run shoot thing. 

I think that covers most of it. On the flip side we got point efficient Lords and sorcerers, cheap as dirt bikes, lots of ap3 torrent flamers, and cultists. I can see the reason for the player base being frustrated. I enjoy the codex regardless, I'm just hoping for a supplement that'll mix things up. It's abit bland, unless you like flying dragons (and hearing your opponent complain about how overpowered they are all game long).


----------



## Nordicus (May 3, 2013)

Bayonet said:


> I actually like the 'Dex, sure it could be better - but it works just fine for me. I also have something that Loyalist Marines don't have - Big fuck off daemon engines and a Space Dragon that breathes metric fuck tons of rage inducing fire.
> 
> Cultists were also a welcome addition, I've now got a horde meatshield that absorbs bullets for me whilst my Word Bearers advance behind them.


I agree with Bayonet - I'm quite liking the codex I must admit. I'm having loads of fun with it and enjoy the diversity in the codex overall


----------



## humakt (Jan 2, 2008)

What a bunch of whiney bastards people are. Since the broken dex 3.5 people are not happy with whatever GW make for chaos. 

The dex is fine. It is perfectly possible to make a competative list or a themed 'fun' list. If you want deamons you are still able to take allies for charater. You get access to all the old faithful units such as Khorne beserkers and Noise marines as well the slightly underwelming warp talons. 

You get the most efficient flyer in the game and still bitch about point cost. I collect CSM and I am more than happy with the dex.

Remember that warbands are not heresy era chapters and if you want to play that sort of list you will need the forge world book.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

humakt said:


> What a bunch of whiney bastards people are. Since the broken dex 3.5 people are not happy with whatever GW make for chaos.
> 
> The dex is fine. It is perfectly possible to make a competative list or a themed 'fun' list. If you want deamons you are still able to take allies for charater. You get access to all the old faithful units such as Khorne beserkers and Noise marines as well the slightly underwelming warp talons.
> 
> ...


so what your basically saying is GW cant get it right for CSM players because they are a bunch of whiney bastards.:so_happy:


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

bitsandkits said:


> so what your basically saying is GW cant get it right for CSM players because they are a bunch of whiney bastards.:so_happy:


Exceeded only by the other whiney bastards who play the other armies


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord (Apr 17, 2009)

Magpie_Oz said:


> Exceeded only by the other whiney bastards who play the other armies


Again exceeded by the whiney bastards who complain about the other whiney bastards.



Stella Cadente said:


> Biggest gripe I hear when you actually listen to the whiny little fucks who play chaos, is the amount of tables they now roll on, determine helmet horn size, determine number of tubes in neck, determine size of cloak


The 'randomness' of the 'dex is also pretty annoying, it's just another thing to keep track of in a game that already has heaps to keep track of. Plus by having random negative effects on a unit (dreadnought crazed being the prime example) you make them more unreliable, which is never good. That's not to say randomness can't be well implemented.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

ChaosRedCorsairLord said:


> Again exceeded by the whiney bastards who complain about the other whiney bastards.


exceeded only by people who want squats back


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord (Apr 17, 2009)

bitsandkits said:


> exceeded only by people who want squats back


Well played sir. You have won the internet and the queen has been alerted.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

bitsandkits said:


> so what your basically saying is GW cant get it right for CSM players because they are a bunch of whiney bastards.:so_happy:


Nowhere near as bad as Eldar Players, but Chaos players are easily a close 2nd, but nobody gives a shit.


----------



## Chaplain-Grimaldus (Aug 4, 2013)

locustgate said:


> I think people aren't happy with CSM cause they are the test dex and most chaos players are.....chaotic. Like most tau players are nerds/tech geeks, Smurfs 12 year old boys or roman fans, crons nerds with a bit of goth tendencies, nids people that play way to much Starcraft, and orks pyros/gear heads. Note results may vary and derived from personal experience.
> 
> Edit: Forgot IG, mostly WW fans.


Lol...... What? So wrong on that one my friend. So so wrong. I'm a Space marine player. Deffo not 12 and wouldn't call myself a "roman fan". 

WW fans? There are fans of the largest conflict to sweep the globe?


----------



## locustgate (Dec 6, 2009)

Chaplain-Grimaldus said:


> Stuff


Like I said from personal experience. 

Military History lovers that like the WWs and Roman empire era.


----------



## Chaplain-Grimaldus (Aug 4, 2013)

Personal experience? Dude you have one strange stereotyped game group lol.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Because whine whine bitch bitch, they aren't the top of the heap with their 3.5 edition codex any more. I am so tired of Iron Warriors played by people who have only a vague idea on what the Iron Warriors fluff is or their paint scheme or their way of war. So many bitching players who can't point and click any more.

I never had any issues with 5th or 6th edition CSM. I never played with the 3.5 ed codex. I think there may be a correlation.

Midnight


----------



## locustgate (Dec 6, 2009)

Chaplain-Grimaldus said:


> Personal experience? Dude you have one strange stereotyped game group lol.


Rough stereotype.


----------



## Chaplain-Grimaldus (Aug 4, 2013)

Interesting. On that note I'm off to make a thread about stereotypes.


----------



## jams (Sep 19, 2009)

Oh I dunno, the ability to take 20man squads of marines, and the ridiculous helldrake in 3's isn't too shabby


----------



## Ddraig Cymry (Dec 30, 2012)

locustgate said:


> Edit: Forgot IG, mostly WW fans.


Yeah... Pretty much haha



Chaplain-Grimaldus said:


> Lol...... What? So wrong on that one my friend. So so wrong. I'm a Space marine player. Deffo not 12 and wouldn't call myself a "roman fan".


He's just referring to Ultramarines, not Space Marines in general. Since Space Marines can be whatever anyone's little heart desires they're harder to classify like that.

I think the codex is great (of course this is the only one I've seen or heard so, yeah), the war-gear and marks system let's you make a unit for pretty much any occasion. People just complain too much.


----------



## Tawa (Jan 10, 2010)

Personally I'm quite happy with the new 'dex.

My only gripe (read as wishlisting) would have been to have some kind of shitbox transport for cultists. I believe that has already been mentioned 

Maybe a cultists/militia/traitor guard type supplement in the future?


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

So for those who are saying "whine whine, bitch bitch, I don't have a problem" I ask you this:

Is there nothing you would change about your codex? Is there nothing you would improve? Is there nothing you would like to see included that wasn't?

If the answer to any of those questions is "Yes" then you're exactly the same as those "whiners". The difference is, you're not talking to other people about it.


----------



## locustgate (Dec 6, 2009)

Sethis said:


> Stuff


You're not whining when you say you don't like something in the dex when you go on how you hate the entire dex then you are whining.


----------



## Ddraig Cymry (Dec 30, 2012)

Sethis said:


> Is there nothing you would change about your codex? Is there nothing you would improve? Is there nothing you would like to see included that wasn't?
> 
> If the answer to any of those questions is "Yes" then you're exactly the same as those "whiners". The difference is, you're not talking to other people about it.





locustgate said:


> You're not whining when you say you don't like something in the dex when you go on how you hate the entire dex then you are whining.


No codex is perfect. None. Frankly, I find Multialtor's a good idea but lacking something efficient for survivability. Also, no drop pods is kind of stupid. I love the fact you can kit out your forces in any way you see fit, and the Supplements may add new features for more diverse play along with the fluff.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Sethis said:


> So for those who are saying "whine whine, bitch bitch, I don't have a problem" I ask you this:
> 
> Is there nothing you would change about your codex? Is there nothing you would improve? Is there nothing you would like to see included that wasn't?
> 
> If the answer to any of those questions is "Yes" then you're exactly the same as those "whiners". The difference is, you're not talking to other people about it.


I think this is probably bang on. Everyone has ways to improve their Codex, but Chaos are by far the most vocal. Why? I assume it's because they used to be absolutely ridiculous and are now just solid, whereas everyone else has had the same experience of being good, then fading into obscurity until their next release. I can think of no other Codex that's made fanboys jizz themselves as hard as 3.5 edition CSM.

Midnight


----------



## Loli (Mar 26, 2009)

Still reading but I always find it funny, any talk of the Chaos dex equals four pages in less than 24 hours. I'll edit this with my thoughts once I've finished reading. But it's still funny.

Honestly it's bits of both sides. 

In part it's people complaining simply because they don't have 3.5 anymore. Where as currently they feel in comparison to the latest Codicies that have been released they are weaker, now maybe as a codex goes yeah they are but they still have some great model slaughtering choices. Though honestly if any Chaos player can tell me that what they have now isn't an upgrade upon what they had with the previous incarnation needs a slap. 

However, one area I fully do agree with Chaos players is getting screwed over in comparison to other Marine dexes, especially Vanilla. You can't say you can't do proper legion rules and such but then give Vanilla chapter tactics, damn straight Chaos have reason to feel screwed. Then you have the units in comparison to Vanilla which are differently costed or for reasons devoid of logic in the case of transports and pods. 

I think they complaints of the codex in comparisons to the other 6th ones is unfair, each one has strengths, weaknesses, good units bad. Chaos is no different. I play 'Nids and DE and can just as easily go through and do the same thing. But in comparison to Vanilla they have many reasons to feel pissed, especially with Vanilla 6th on the horizon.


----------



## shaantitus (Aug 3, 2009)

I like the new dex, there is only one thing that irritates me. The defiler. I know there are other units in the dex that are priced oddly(see previous comments about the land raider) but the pricing on the defiler was a total fuckup. It was not great in the previous dex and now it is just silly. 
Other than that it is a good book. People forget that we can have allies. So now the demons section that used to be in the 3.5 dex can be done, if you want to have an army with basilisks it can be done. Really all we need is there if we use our heads. 

Please remember though that I play for fun, not competition.


----------



## Iron_Freak220 (Nov 8, 2009)

Hey crazies, 

So it seems that 'Why GW can't win with CSM players?' breaks down into the following answers as voiced by you all:

1. The CSM dex is used to play test the newest edition rules and is therefore deliberately held back with regard to power and creativity.

2. CSM players expect too much after having played with the 3.5 ed codex.

3. GW blatantly puts more effort into Loyalist SM and as such offends CSM players.

4. All 40k players are whiney or want squats back.


Did I miss anything? 

Also, I'm not really sure where I wanted this thread to go. I think I just wanted to start a more in depth conversation about GW and CSM in the hopes that upper management will get that one more straw on the camels back that will finally push them into doing Chaos like it deserves.


----------



## Ravner298 (Jun 3, 2011)

Loli said:


> Though honestly if any Chaos player can tell me that what they have now isn't an upgrade upon what they had with the previous incarnation needs a slap.


Chosen lost LD and infiltrate, but remained the same cost wise.

Oblits lost fearless, LD, and remained the same cost.

Defilers got a price hike for no reason at all, and are now ridiculously overcosted.

Basic csms, to get to the same kit they had in the 4th ed codex, are 1 pt more expensive.

Unless you're talking about the codex as a whole, then there's no question that its a marked improvement from 4th. 



MidnightSun said:


> . I can think of no other Codex that's made fanboys jizz themselves as hard as 3.5 edition CSM.


Power aside, it was solely because of the ability to run your favorite legion, with limitations and special wargear. Its 20 extra pages that allowed you to play Alpha legion, Iron warriors, Night Lords, Word Bearers, Black Legion, World Eaters, Death Guard, Emperors Children and Thousand sons. 4th and 6th hasnt had the same flavor, even if you can build a fluffy army regardless. It's not too much to ask for, considering the space marines are getting exactly what chaos has been pleading GW for since 3.5, after they told us it couldn't be done. Take away the chapter traits and toss all the flavours of marine into the same book and tell them to paint their marines red and pretend theyre blood angels and youll see the same uproar.

The 6th books power level is abit lacking *at the highest tier of competitive play*. So basically, a non issue for everyone reading this thread. It still does fine at local events, and has a few nasty suprises. GW could honestly give the metaphoric baby its bottle if they just did legions justice in supplements, but after the travesty of the black legion supplement, it doesnt look very favorable. Despite it all, I love my CSM, and will continue to wreck havoc with them.


----------



## Achaylus72 (Apr 30, 2011)

What i did was got over my Chaos Nerd Rage and did something about it.

I am in the process of writing my own Codex to make my Army.

And i can do anything i damned well want, hell i have even given my CSM Tactical Squads Plasma Cannons, Heavy Flamers, Multi Meltsa and have assigned points for them, also i have given my army Chaos Attack Bikes, Chaos Land Speeders, Chaos Land Raider Redeemers/Crusaders, Chaos Stormlords as superheavy transports to carry my 10 man Chaos Termaniator Squads.

Anything Space Marines have or will ever have in my continual updated Chaos Codex my Chaos Army will get and the appropriate points. Also i have not gotten rid of the last dexes icon point, as far as i am concerned they remain and i have rejigged the mark points as well

I reckon the current Chaos Codex is a very good book, i love it, it gets two thumbs up from me.


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Ravner298 said:


> Defilers got a price hike for no reason at all, and are now ridiculously overcosted.


Roughly two hundred points that nets you:
-A battlecannon and some other guns
-It will not die
-The daemonic special rule (I believe)
-Daemonic possession
-As many hull points as a land raider

Yeah it has the armour of a dreadnought, but unless your laying a decent amount of anti armour at it, it will not die and that number of hull points should serve it quite well.


----------



## jesse (Sep 29, 2008)

So i figured id chip in my two cents as ive thought about the new chaos codex alot, and i feel like i have reasonable complaints. 

When i first got my hands on the new CSM book, i was honestly appalled. My favorite and dearest units got hit with a nerf bat pretty hard in my opinion. Khorne berserkers lost a base attack but gained one on the charge. They went down a point, but i still think it was unnecessary. Defilers went up in cost for no reason, and chosen lost the ability to outflank for no reduction in cost. I also think that deamon princes got hit pretty hard. Dont get me wrong, they are absolute beat sticks in combat, but lost alot of less beefy due to reduction in toughness and the addition of grounding tests. They also cost a ridiculous amount of points. Again, these are the core of most of my 5th edition lists and felt angered at their reduction in usefulness.

As for the rest of the codex, i was disapointed to find out that we didnt get a viable landraider or variant thereof. and not adding dreadclaws also was a miss for me. I understand it would complicate things because forgeworld has rules for them, but i still think they should have been included in the codex. Also, our wargear section feels really bland to me. We have viable pieces of wargear, but to me, they are limited to the axe of blind fury, and burning brand. There are also some other decents ones, but overall the best and obvious choices are the two i mentioned. (at least to me) I look at the dark eldar codex and the plethora of options available to their HQs and wonder what happened in the development process. 

My biggest gripe overall, has to be the exclusion of legion rules. With the new space marine book imminent, im actually pretty disapoint that the chaos book didnt get the same treatment. 

That isnt to say that the chaos codex is bad. It did alot of things right to me. The inclusion of warpsmiths and dark apostles bring a larger variety to our HQ section, as well as making more fluff oriented lists a bit more possible. Our fast attack section is amazing now. The helldrake is arguably by many players, one of the best flyers in the game. Personally its a bit overpowered for my tastes, but that has more to do with the FAQ that came out shortly after the books release than the unit itself. Bikes desperately needed a points reduction, and even chaos spawn are viable! 

Overall, the book makes a variety of lists viable, which is nice, because unlike last edition, there are a few more things that make CSM competitive compared to lash oblit spam. It just seems vastly underpowered compared to the other 6th edition books, mainly tau empire and eldar.

Just my two cents,
Jesse

As a side note to MidnightSun, this isnt a personal attack or anything, but i started playing toward the end of fourth edition, and have only heard about the 3.5 codex. I absolutely agree that there are players out there who complain simply because they dont have the fabled 3.5 codex anymore, but i think for the most part, stigma with the new book stems from the fact that the newer 6th edition books do their forces a fair bit of justice(particularity the upcoming C:SM), whereas our book, isnt what we knew it COULD be.


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

Well, as a Chaos player since 2nd ed I can fairly say that this is either the 2nd or 3rd best codes chassis had ever had (not counting the original Realms of Chaos books.) 

3.5 was probably the coolest because it offered SO much flexibility to play any number of different armies with so much customization. And I say this as a player who painted their army Iron Warriors during second edition but never used the Iron Warriors rules under 3.5. I played a mostly balanced force (assault focused) with a bunch of assault dreadnoughts, havocs, and daemons.

The worst chaos codex ever has to be 3rd ed. Which was awkward and terrible.

2nd ed's was pretty awesome without being broken. And I think 6th is right there with 2nd, give or take a bit. 

As for why all the complaining, for me Bits nailed it. The possible flexibility is missing, and that undermines the fluff or feel. And the fact that some units points/abilities just doesn't make sense. Who would take warp talons over a Heldrake? Etc. But all in all I think the 6th ed codex is a good one.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

darkreever said:


> Roughly two hundred points that nets you:
> -A battlecannon and some other guns
> -It will not die
> -The daemonic special rule (I believe)
> ...


That isn't good enough for chaos players though, they want
-twin-linked long barrel mega battle cannons
-twin-linked exterminator autocannons with skyfire that can engage ground targets at normal BS
-6 close combat weapons on top of 6 attacks normal and +D6 on the charge
-armour 14 all round with the old living metal necron rule
And everything else all for about....100pts, and the spoilt little cocks would STILL bitch


----------



## 5tonsledge (May 31, 2010)

Hi i'm a Chaos Space Marine player. Anyways i'll start with this. The new Chaos Codex is a masterpiece. It looks fantastic each page has Chaotic beauty on every page. Each paged turn gets me hard. It's on hard back being the first of GW's hard back books. The money spent was worth the art work alone. If you noticed all of these things were cosmetic related. GW covered up the fact that they still haven't given Chaos players what they want with pretty pictures and a hard back book.
Now I love to talk shit about Phil Kelly, but i want this to be more on the actually problems with the codex. Philipus Kellius did make a codex that was playable, and ill admit if you take a decent list to a shop you can still win most games. Chaos has always been a strong force, because of the ability to spit out a shit load of special weapons. I honestly can't think of any other army that can bring as much ap3 and ap2 weapons in one list(gaurd being the only rival). Chosen possibly being one of the most cost efficient units in the game. Yet you still don't see them make table top by standard players.
-
Phil Kelly flaws in the codex. For the most part the man is a decent codex writer. The fluff was decent, he brought things into the codex that Gav Thorpe either tossed out or simply forgot. Phil brought back Legion Specific Rules? Kelly decided to take Cult legion Troop choice, and make them elites unless you field either a Standard Lord of chaos or Cult Special Characters. This idea was fucking brilliant, and gave all chaos players the biggest erection they've had since 3.5. The "BUT". Phil took this idea and never really took off with it. No other wargear unlocked from Legion spec rules. Now maybe us chaos players were wanting too much, but you got to understand where we are coming from. Download the 3.5 CSM and you'll see why we cry. Putting that aside there are more things to complain about.
-
New units. Well the units are pretty fucking awesome.....Looking. HelDrakes Being the exception because with the Bale Flamer and the fact that they are armor 12, got a 5+ invul, and can vector strike at strength 7. Dont get me wrong the other units can be fielded and you can probably have successful results, but these units have no real purposes other than costing you about 60+dollars and looking pretty in your army box. Forgefiends deserving a shout out because they almost seem awesome, but at ballistic skill 3 really limits them to taking nothing but ectoplasm cannons.
-
Demon princes. alright some people will still stand by the new prince rules. First thing i would like to say is that Flying Monstrous creature rules are not something that demon prince have. Its something the rule book gives all monstrous creatures with wings the Flying special rule. So lets break this down. so people say the new princes are op so lets point out the changes in the rules. Some of the demon princes stats have been changed i do believe he got a bump in WS and i think he got a bump in his Init. But other than that no stats have really seen any raise. Now some of the things you will notice is that the unit cost has been bumped up by a lot. Demon prince's do not come standard with Power Armor if you would like to have a 3+ armor save you gotta pay for it. Wings were once a 25 point upgrade now go for around 40 points. These upgrades really hurt considering you are already sitting on a hefty 230+ unit. Then you gotta take a demon mark of the 4 gods. these marks only cost 10-15 points. Here is the one new thing that Demon princes get "Demon weapons". Now these new demon weapons are pretty epic but they are gonna cost you an arm and a leg anywhere between 35-40 points you can field a demon prince with an awesome weapon. If you want your demon prince to actually be useful as a flyer you need to be a psyker, but dont forget if you wanna chance to get the ever awesome Iron Arm you got to be at least psyker mastery 2 because you have to take a power from you demon mark. and if you want to give yourself a better chance to get Iron Arm you probably want to be psyker mastery 3. each upgrade costs you 25 points so thats 75 points for that. At the End of the day your beloved prince is going to run for 320+ points to actually field a good unit. And here is the "BUT". If you fail to roll Iron Arm your Expensive demon prince has a pretty good chance of being instant killed considering he is only T5 and can be given Marks anymore so he cant take nurgle and b T6 or tzentch and have a 4+ invul. and on top of that. You cant take a sigil of corruption to give him another +1 to his invul. Old princes came with power armor standard had the same stats basically, and they had eternal warrior. wings costed 25 points and at the end of the day you would spend anywhere between 125 points to 200 on him. Op maybe
-
Now i can look past the crazy fucking demon prince nerf and ill admit almost every power gaming chaos player ran 2 demon princes back in the day because ther were cost efficient. They next thing i want to point out is psyker nerf and how it effects chaos. So the 6th ed psyker mastery is neat. But in a game where you want to play to win. rolling on a table for powers is a stupid fucking concept. I dont get it at all. Why GW writers thought that in a competitive game people wanted to deal with random psyker charts. They put 1 to 2 useful abilities per psyker tree and make you roll a dice. I for one dont like the fact that i have to run a unit that i want to do a specific job and I cant control whether or not they preform how i want. Phil decided that we needed random tree in our codex. so now if you want to run a chaos psyker you got to roll on not ony your own Chaos powers( none of the loyalist chapters have to do that) but the 6th ed powers.
-
One of the biggest problems is that Chaos 3.5 was so fucking awesome. It had legion spec rules. Now if you dont know what that means. It means that inside your codex there is 9 more codex's. For every army was a list of wargear upgrades that could only be taken if you were playing that army. Only units with the marks of that legion could take wargear options from the legion spec rules. On top of there being legion spec rules theres was also a vast amount of chaos wargear. Demon armor that could be taken on Lords 2+armor save and didnt count as bulky. a shit load of weapons and types. Most worthy to mention was Black weapons +2 strength. The list goes on and on(seriously take a look at the 3.5 codex). Comparison to the pain a chaos players feel from 3.5 to 5th ed codex is like a PC gamer being forced to use a mac.
- Chaos players dont rage at their army because they suck. They Rage because of the Fluff and constant Nerf on our stuff. 4th edition was basically a cock slap to the face for 3.5 players, But the codex still had a great build. Although it seemed that one of the most abused things from 4th was Lash of Submission. From 4th to 5th we again see more nerfs this one not hurting as bad because we were still spitting out the salty suprise Gav Thorpe dumped in our mouths after CSM 4.0.
-
Anyways to sum it up we still got a decent competitive army list, Although we lack skyfire Units maybe an FAQ will come out and make Forgefiends have skyfire special rule. Theres a lot of things i failed to mention, but i already got a wall of text and shit 3/4 of the people that follow up post wont even read my rant post. And The only army i feel has the right to bitch and complain about their army is Tyranid players.


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

What i dont get is how Xhosa players can't stop bitching
Do you really think you could ever equal the fanboys?!?!
Daemon engines are pretty unique last time I checked, and pretty good.
Helldrakes are probes the best new edition flier around, old codex cheese oviosky beats it but meh
The defiler, it's pretty good! A dreadnought with a massive gun and extra combat weapons, why is it so shit!?!?
Yeah, you don't have big cultist boxes, boohoo, many over armies don't have boxes for somestuff full stop.
Your marks are insane, and your banners, gifts, and your princes with wings, and your deamon weapons, and your gods troops
Stop bitching and appriciate what you have!


----------



## 5tonsledge (May 31, 2010)

Another way to understand how we feel about every codex since 3.5 is to Force all the non vanilla marine players (SpacePuppies, SpaceVampires, and SpaceHypocrites) to use the vanillia codex. All of the unique models you have are now useless, and your paint job might as well be blue with gold trim. For Ward Knights and Imperial Cheese they have to use their previous codex.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Iron_Freak220 said:


> It seems like everything Games Workshop does in regards to Chaos Space Marines turns out to disappoint a large majority of CSM players. The last three codecies were an upset to many, even the new Black Legion supplement which isn't even out yet is already disappointing people. I'm curious as to why people think that is.
> 
> Now don't get me wrong, I am also one of those disappointed people. I feel like there could have been so much more creative potential in Chaos Space Marines than there is.
> 
> ...


I'm jumping into this a little late, but I feel that the 3.5 Edition codex is to blame. It's created an unreasonable precedent of what a CSM codex is and even people who have never seen it before still use it as the golden standard of what CSM should be getting. And frankly they need to stop. 

The book was a broken mess that had lead to an insane number of Iron Warriors armies being played because they were mathematically the best things you could field out of pretty much any codex at the time.

And there was another issue with the book that most people aren't aware of: to have all those lovely legion rules you had to follow a strict set of restrictions. That's right, the book that gave players the "most creative freedom" actually prevented them from being able to field a large number of options depending on what army they were building. Your list was half built for you by picking what legion you were using.

Now that isn't to say the current book is perfect, but in terms of allowing the player the freedom to take what they want it's pretty damn good. You can build almost any legion out of the book with a little creativity and perhaps some allies (something I'm willing to bet the book was built around the idea of). You want Word Bearers? Ally some daemons, take daemon engines, cultists, a unit or two of Marines, a Dark Apostle and stir vigoriously. Iron Warriors? Guard allies with artillery (Siege Breacher shells are a nice choice), and a lot of unmarked CSMs. Death Guard? Mark of Nurgle on Everything. Ect. Be more creative than just crying about the problems you perceive and the book starts opening up to you rather nicely.

But that's just my take as someone who played the 4th Ed book. 

And seriously, CSM players, if you feel you were so badly stiffed, the least you could do is be productive about it. Write a convincing letter to the Devs why X needs to be in the next book, or why Y needs to be changed. If nothing else you may see an improvement next time, or even a 6.5 Ed book (because *if* the rumors ARE true, 6th might be here for a while which means we could eventually see 6.5 Ed books). 

Either way, I think forums in general are pretty much past the point of actually listening to most CSM players cry because it's been the same persistent droning since the 4th Edition book dropped. They really aren't helping their case when they hijack the Space Marine rumor threads to cry either (not here, but I've seen ti happen a LOT lately and it's made me fairly cold to their "plight").


----------



## Iron_Freak220 (Nov 8, 2009)

The problem with the Daemon Engines and Defiler included is their points cost and effectiveness on the battlefield. Because the Forgefiend and Defiler cost 200 points each they will rarely make that back before they're destroyed. The 5++ doesnt really help against 3 penetrating lascannon shots and IWND doesn't help if youre blown up.

Now the Vindicator's a decent choice. They're cheap, heavily armored and a large blast will do roughly the same damage as 3 ectoplasm cannons and have the bonus of being S10. They will also almost always make their points back. 

But guess what?! Chaos vindicators are no different than the Loyalist versions! So therein lies a main concern of CSM players. What makes us different?

Unfortunately it's not the Heldrake. The Heldrake is powerful to be sure but it's not particularly Chaos-y. It's just a plane that can drop a template. It's very strong but and looks like a dragon but none of its rules represent anything particuarly specific to Chaos. Not that it should, but it just doesn't.

We do have Obliterators, Hell Talons, Possessed, Spawn, and then the Daemon Engines. Those are literally the only units in the codex that can be considered a uniquely Chaos unit. And all but one of them are competitively terrible.

We have the cult units to be sure but they are elites unless unlocked by a marked lord. Zerks and Sons are not worth their points however. And the other two are relatively underwhelming to be considered an elite and so you would want to move them to troops to be tactically efficient. Just another limitation.

And then the rest, Havocs even with autocannons are just devastators. Chaos lords are captains; sorcerors are librarians; Warsmiths are techmarines; Dark apostles are chaplains; Daemon Princes are good but not unique to CSMs; the Chaos marines themselves are tacticals; cultists are guardsman; raptors are assault marines, bikers are bikers, the rhino, predator, vindicator and land raider are all the same.

So most of our codex is Loyalist with some uncompetitive Chaos-y units thrown in and then 3-4 decent Chaos units (Oblits, Heldrake, Plague Marines, Noise Marines).

We complain because we might as well have spent all our money on Loyalist books and units. We complain because our codex gets no effort put into it. It's not that hard either. 

For all those complaining we do something about it, let me show the devs how easy it is to make Chaos different than Loyalists without even trying:

"Chaos Bikers, because of the spikes and blades commonly fitted onto their rides gain D3 S5 Hammer of Wrath hits instead of the normal 1."

Done! Easy. I did that in 15 seconds. GW has had years to work on the book and still gives us a book that is 1/2 Loyalist, 1/4 Crap, 1/8 decent, and 1/8 pretty awesome to be honest (heldrake).

And for those of you saying we should do something and talk to the devs, what do you think all these posts are about? Do you think GW doesn't go on the internet? They see this stuff too and the more we fuss about it the better chance they will put out a better codex.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

5tonsledge said:


> Another way to understand how we feel about every codex since 3.5 is to Force all the non vanilla marine players (SpacePuppies, SpaceVampires, and SpaceHypocrites) to use the vanillia codex. All of the unique models you have are now useless, and your paint job might as well be blue with gold trim.


This seems like a pretty decent analogy, actually.



5tonsledge said:


> For Ward Knights and Imperial Cheese they have to use their previous codex.


Imperial Guard's update from their 4th edition book to their 5th edition book was almost exactly the same difference between 3.5ed CSM and 6th edition CSM, except 6th ed. Chaos don't have the flaws that made Imperial Guard so imbalanced. Imperial Guard aren't complaining that they lost Doctrines but gained just generally better more stuff, and went from a shitty dex to a functional, powerful, interesting book. Only CSM are, presumably because they had flaws that made them very imbalanced in 3rd. Like I said, the problem is falling from the top spot. Chaos used to be broken and now isn't so people whine about it.

Midnight


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

Actually I was miffed at losing doctrines, sharpshooter was awesome


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

I actually rather like the new chaos codex. I think a lot of things could make more sense, especially point wise. And considering how staid the last codex was there are a number of curious nerfs. But it seems to be a really solid book.

I particularly like the additional focus on daemon engines. Daemon engines are a great opportunity for GW to add distinctiveness to the Chaos marine codex. 

The Heldrake is a one trick pony, but it's a hell of a trick. The forge fiends are expensive, but they synergize well with Tzeentch heralds. 8 shots re-rolling misses? Yes please.

I haven't tried them but the mauler fiend seems to have a lot going for it. They're relatively cheap and would also synergize well with other assault units since they are really fast and strip attacks from enemies.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

I think part of the problem overall is that people tend to dismiss others people's concerns (note the "s" - as in, multiple or plural) as a single problem.

A Chaos player might take issue with blandness, uncompetitiveness, bizzare point costs, FoC choking and comparative effort versus loyalist legions and someone who disagrees will simply say "Yeah yeah, you don't have 3.5 any more, cry me a river".

Instead of, you know, tackling the problems on their individual merits, which might see more agreement and rational debate and less words like "whining", "fanboys" and "ungrateful".


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

Well said Sethis.

It occurs to me that the issue may go back even further than the 3.5 codex. 

If I wanted to set a high bar for "coolness" it would be tough to be cooler than the original Realms of Chaos books _Slaves to Darkness_ and _The Lost and the Damned_. Chaos at its very out set had among the most developed and interesting material around. (Some of which GW is still using, recycling, or revising).

+ Rogue Trader: The realms of chaos were pretty fucking awesome. 
+ 2nd ed chaos codex also pretty awesome. 
- 3rd ed, most terrible ever. (Like all the other codices at the time).
+ 3.5 another awesome codex (taking its inspiration from the realms of chaos)
- 4th/5th ed, better than 3.0, not as cool as any other chaos codex
+ 6th ed looking a lot better! But realm of chaos cool or 3.5 cool, but still quite good.

There's a lot of good work on chaos to compare to. I think it was reasonable to be disappointed in general with 4th, but as Sethis pointed out, those disappointments are often far less than the whiney tooth gnashing of nerdlings and more a nostalgic loss of what used to be.


----------



## Iron_Freak220 (Nov 8, 2009)

I agree with Sethis. We're not all complaining because our codex isn't as strong as 3.5. Most of us are complaining because of lack of creativity and originality or odd costed/useless units. 

The example of the IG was used. They lost some interesting things but gained a lot of strength and variety. That's awesome for them. Same with the new Eldar and Tau. But CSM just lost things with no visible (keyword) effort to make Chaos individual or unique. 

I think I speak for a lot of us when it seems like Games Workshop just doesn't care (true or not) about CSM or their players. And that hurts when you've invested countless hours and several thousand dollars in that army.


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

To be honest it seems that gw doesn't care about anyone but their monies.
And use iron freaks example about spiky bike impact hits, that's not chaosy or unique, it's just dumb, and bait OP, like I hear 3.5 was, more unique is called marks, your models look awesome and detailed! Maybe you should get different special weapons perhaps and slighty different vehicles AA yours should heresy era, but your chaos SPACE MARINES so don't bitch that you have SPACE MARINE stuff or chaos stuff, your more unique than any blood angle for sure
And why do you need your armie list to say death guard for you to paint them as death gaurd? Is that not the beuty of painting them YOURSELF? how YOU want them painted? As their YOUR army? Your acting like your the old tau dex with the options you have!


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

Didn't read many other comments, but i'll briefly share my thoughts

Basically, I feel GW has just lazily given us the marks of chaos in the codex to let us work out how to build our favourite legions. Want Thousand Sons? "Here, take Thousand Sons as troop choices by taking Ahriman or a tzeentch sorc and mark the rest of your units with Tzeentch"...Even though a 6++ is absolutely useless and a lazy dumb idea. Slaanesh and Nurgle are more useful...But usefulness and rules isn't really the point: 

Point is it lacks any character: As a Thousand Sons player we get Rubrics with ap3 boltguns, and Ahriman, who for one of the most deep character sin all of 40k (the guy is over 10,000 years old) really lacks imagination to say the least. He should have psychic powers unique to him for all that experience....But instead gets one shitty tzeentch power and the generic powers in the rulebook...What about something fun? It just seems so lazy and dull. I mean, yeah, I have modeled some terminators with mark of tzeentch and in 1ksons colours, I think they look pretty cool...But why don't we have Thousand Sons termies, Havocs etc? With unique powers and rules. Not all the 1ksons got turned into rubrics. So something other than slow and purposeful marines with ap3 boltguns would've been nice. There is so much potential but GW don't seem interested. 
What about Death Guard? They get to use Plague Marines and yeah you can mark any generic CSM with nurgle and they play like the tough cookies they are portrayed in the fluff. Typhus is great: Great model, great playstyle, and plague zombies are a very welcome return and shit loads of fun to model and play. Nurglites got the better deal in this codex from the character point of view. 
I could carry on and analyse Emperors Children, World Eaters, but my point is the same: If we want to play our favourite legions all we have are the cult troop choices and then we have to make do with marks, and most of the marks do not really represent the character of each legion. The codex gave us a substandard framework to work with in designing our legions, and that I guess is my main qualm with the codex. 

GW were lazy in my opinion. I would absolutely love supplements for 1ksons, Death Guard, Emperors Children...Instead they gave us Black Legion...Whhhhyyy???? Don't understand that at all, since we have everything we need in the codex for an undivided army. Seems so pointless and again just really really dull.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

So to take the point about character - what would it take for there to be "enough" character in your legions?

I mean, what it sounds like is that you think the Mark of X should function differently for each squad, right? (which is a cool idea, don't get me wrong)

So if you want a 1k Sons army then you might have the following:

Sorceror: MoT allows him to reroll what powers he has at the start of the game.

Chosen/Terminators: MoT grants them rerolls to hit through the gift of foresight.

Troops/Raptors/Bikers/Havocs: MoT grants the boon of mutation to non-rubric Marines, every Champ can roll once on the Gifts chart.

Cultists: MoT grants the ability "Pawns of the Prince of Lies" which allows Cultist models to "Look Out Sir" for any friendly Chaos Marines within 3"

And so on. How many unique rules do you think would be enough? Do you think it's reasonable that GW creates and playtests these rules and fits them all into one codex? Do you think it's reasonably easy to balance so many different effects for different units?

I'm not trying to get at anyone here, I'm honestly curious.


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

These are all very reasonable questions. 

_I mean, what it sounds like is that you think the Mark of X should function differently for each squad, right? (which is a cool idea, don't get me wrong)_

Maybe not even that: Just have it so that Thousand Sons Havocs have certain unique traits as opposed to the generic undivided kind. Have them all psykers that fire psychically charged weapons, or something (like psycannons perhaps). 
I like your ideas for terminators: A prescience type ability. In the 1ksons novel they are constantly using prescience. Maybe even organise them into 'covens' like in the book: Some specialised in using warp flame, some using prescience abilities and so forth. 

To answer your other questions: How many unique rules would be enough? I think i'd be happy with supplements for 1ksons, death guard etc and keep the main chaos codex as an undivided/vanilla codex with marks of chaos that are better thought out. 
The other option is that the main chaos codex could cover all bases: However I think that making 4 armies (Death Guard, 1ksons, World Eaters, Emperors Children) work in 1 codex would be too much to playtest and release. 

I actually do not mind the chaos codex as it is now: With some work i've managed to use marks (like slaanesh) to represent different chaos legions. My bikers are slaaneshi so have painted them Emps Children colours, for example. But the only thing that makes them Emperors Children are +1 I and the colours I have painted them: It would be nice if a supplement came along that gave them some unique rules and playstyles. I think that is pretty reasonable. Instead we got an undivided expansion supplement that was unnecessary. They seem to have done things the wrong way around. 

I am personally in favour of doing the 4 mono-god armies via supplement: GW would surely make good money doing this? The demand is clearly there from Chaos players. Doing it with supplements would give much more room for creativity and building a character and just easier to balance IMO.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

So let's assume that the Undivided Legions can all be made satisfactorily from the vanilla book... Which IS an assumption, given that it isn't exactly chock full of Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors, Night Lords and Word Bearers love - although thinking about it, all the new releases fit into them: Cultists, Forgefiends, Raptors/Talons and Dark Apostles, respectively - which might indicate that future love for the Marked Legions is in order... I digress.

That still leaves you with the problem with the supplements - to whit, they don't seem to be competitively viable, nor indeed to have much of an impact on how the army actually plays out on the table. For example with the Iyanden Supplement, the only real difference between it and an army made from the Vanilla codex is how many Spiritseers you can take. Wraithguard can already be taken as Troops, it doesn't affect how many Wraith units you can have in total, and none of the Wraith units gained any extra innate abilities. On the other hand, you gain new wargear, new Warlord Traits, and new Psychic powers, along with the option to make a Wraithlord/Knight your Warlord.

Is that enough special rules? The consensus seems to be "No". The Black Legion book seems to be even worse off, simply making VOTLW mandatory for no effective or flavourful gains beyond paying through the nose for super-elite terminators that are WS/BS5 and having Chosen (a fairly meh-ish unit) moved to Troops without needing Abaddon along with the usual suspects of Wargear and Traits.

Given most players disappointment with said supplements, what would be the answer? My suggestion would be "More work, slower releases" for them. Don't drop a supplement when the codex has only been out for a month or two - use them to re-ignite interest over an entire game cycle by seriously editing the vanilla book and even throwing in some new model releases. As a template for an army I know better than Chaos, here's a selection of ideas for a Saim Hann supplement:

- New Wargear
- New Warlord Traits
- Army-wide special rule to replace Battle Focus for non-Aspect units
- Restrictions to available Units (e.g. Jetbikes are 2+, Support Weapons can't be taken, Wraith units 0-1 etc)
- Additional rules for the "signature" units i.e. Jetbikes, Vypers and Grav Tanks. At the most basic level, maybe grant Skilled Rider to all of them, maybe give each type of unit a unique rule.
- New Special Characters and/or Units
- A new Jetbike model and a Finecast/Plastic Jetseer released at same time
- A release schedule that drops a supplement for a codex maybe 8 months after release? With the aim being to have a supplement for each major army within a given book by the end of the edition (if it was the first one printed)?

What do you guys think about that as a list of things that "should" be part of supplements? Too much? Not enough? Unrealistic?


----------



## Iron_Freak220 (Nov 8, 2009)

Going back to the "How to represent Legions efficiently without a ton of rules" subject, I would approach it in this way:

God Specific Wargear Lists.

Since we are going with the Thousand Sons they would have a Tzeentchian close combat section (that terminators/chosen would have access to), a ranged section (that only Havocs/chosen have access to), and then a Tzeentch rewards that any Character would have access too, all in addition to the standard stuff.

That, in my opinion, is a very easy and efficient way of allowing Legions to be more represented without adding a lot of needless rules. 4 more pages tops would be needed. 1 page for each Legion.


----------



## 5tonsledge (May 31, 2010)

I was really disapointed in Phil Kelly. For being the writer of Space Puppies 2.0 he sure didnt seem to put as much love and attention to detail into the Chaos Space Marine codex


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

It's not fair! Every body hates tau because I can't have bor'kan sept on my army list! Nor can ANYBODY else for that matter, space marines can't have salamanders or white scars on their list!
You use the units at your disposal and your paint scene to make your favoured chapter, by NO means do you need your tactical squads to have salamanders or whatever on your list, and I'm pretty sure all thousand sons where turned rubric, but they could have been termies or heavies yes, but you don't need 4 supplements when everybody else gets one, although techniqly smerfs get 4 but their the fan boys so suck it up
As I see it you can make any legion/warbands you like, world eaters, lots of raptors, marks of korne, thousand sons, ahriman, thousands, yeah works fine, emporers children, slanneshi, whatever they used, so noise marines, whatever, works fine, just ask any other codex, they don't have a problem with this
To think you should get 4 supplements legion specifics and 4 times the units 'cos each unit needs different gods profiles, is kind of selfish

At a stretch, you could get gods own wargear but that's it, maybe tzeench could get AP3 spam bolters, korne gets his axes, slannesh noise equipment, nurgle, I don't know, perhaps fly swarms as an additional shooting attack or something
But not a whole page each


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

Adding a single page for each legion and a page for generic renegades was all that was needed.

Before 3.5 dropped White Dwarf ran the index Astartes series where each legion was given expanded fluff (much of which has now been raped) and about 2/3 of a page for rules. Sure they weren't always the best rules but they added character. That all a lot of chaos players want. Sure you have the whiney ones that want the best codex ever cos it like marines and deamons and spikes and shizzle, but every codex has those

All the current book needs just slight couple of pages of flavour rules. Really quick examples from the top of my head

If you play AL your cultists gain infiltrate but you cant take any marks. 
If you play WE all units get MoK for free but must assault if they are able and must take a leadership check to not run at the closest visable enemy unit in the shooting phase 
If you play IW you trade 2 FA slots for an extra heavy slot. All shooting gains tank hunters
If you play WB all units can reroll (pass or fail) moral checks and EoTG but must include a dark apostle. If the DA is killed enemy counts as having an additional victory point. 
NL all units gain Primal fear, (Units usually immune to fear must test) but you lose a HS slot
ETC ETC ETC 

Just some flavour to make them different. You don't have to hamstring players to play with a certain list but just add some character

Then just give a wargear list of maybe 10 "deamon" weapons. 2 for each god and 2 generic eg Mannreaper, Filth Mace Blissgiver, Bedlam Staff, Dark Blade, Kai Gun, etc 

Its just about making the legions play *slightly* differently to each other.

And before any one asks no I don't give a flying damn about a new LR variety. Thats stupid GW er well give them a new model that will make it better thinking


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

But why should chaos get legion specific rules if no one else does, I would love if every one had minor rules differences to add variety, but that should be for everyone, not on specific case, it would have been nice if the supplements gave us this, so had real purpose other than slightly different for gw to make money on with little effort what so ever

Just saying, what makes chaos so special?
If I was gw, I would've given a different landraider, only one, but one focusing on assault proberly, do maybe higher capacity but weaker sponsons, such as T/L heavy flamers, and bonus to tank shocks due to spiky treads, like a death roller


----------



## 5tonsledge (May 31, 2010)

kiro the avenger! said:


> But why should chaos get legion specific rules if no one else does,


????????????????????? 4 space marine codex's i guess no body else has any legion spec rules eh. God bro


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

5tonsledge said:


> ????????????????????? 4 space marine codex's i guess no body else has any legion spec rules eh. God bro


Plus the new legion specific rules in the upcoming Vanilla dex, which gives army wide special abilities to every other legion.


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

The space marine spin offs are codex's not rules in the main dex, and i'll wait until the new codex is out to see what the chapter specific rules are


----------



## 5tonsledge (May 31, 2010)

kiro the avenger! said:


> The space marine spin offs are codex's not rules in the main dex, and i'll wait until the new codex is out to see what the chapter specific rules are


Ah my bad guess that makes total since. They got their own codex so its not the same as having special rules for an army. This guy what a troll


----------



## 5tonsledge (May 31, 2010)

Sethis said:


> Plus the new legion specific rules in the upcoming Vanilla dex, which gives army wide special abilities to every other legion.


hopefully they buff vanilla. i felt bad they were kinda point heavy and seems like they were really restricted to Vulkan list for competitive play


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

kiro the avenger! said:


> I'm pretty sure all thousand sons where turned rubric, but they could have been termies or heavies yes, but you don't need 4 supplements when everybody else gets one, although techniqly smerfs get 4 but their the fan boys so suck it up


Woah. Nobody said 1ksons should get 4 supplements. I was saying it was reasonable to get 1 supplement for each of the 4 legions: Death Guard, 1ksons, Emperors Children, World Eaters. Maybe one for Alpha Legion and Night lords too (Iron Warriors are easy to make from the codex with all the daemon engines, so feel this is unnecessary). 

Why is this unreasonable?

Also, read Ahriman: Exile. Not all of them were turned rubric. And anyway, as you say not all the rubrics were tactical marines with boltguns, surely? Surely they had some plasma lying around at the very least...


----------



## 5tonsledge (May 31, 2010)

Straken's_Fist said:


> Woah. Nobody said 1ksons should get 4 supplements. I was saying it was reasonable to get 1 supplement for each of the 4 legions: Death Guard, 1ksons, Emperors Children, World Eaters. Maybe one for Alpha Legion and Night lords too (Iron Warriors are easy to make from the codex with all the daemon engines, so feel this is unnecessary).
> 
> Why is this unreasonable?
> 
> Also, read Ahriman: Exile. Not all of them were turned rubric. And anyway, as you say not all the rubrics were tactical marines with boltguns, surely? Surely they had some plasma lying around at the very least...


Don't bother Kiro is a lost cause. Half the stuff he says doesn't make sense


----------



## Ravner298 (Jun 3, 2011)

It's amusing to me that people associate the whining from losing 3.5 is because everyone played iron warriors competitively. It has almost nothing to do with being top dog. You know what night lords got? More raptors. And night vision. And everyone was happy as a pig in poop. Why? Flavor. Diversity. Zion speaks of limitations placed on us and how it contradicts us when we mention the freedom of the books of chaos......taking your sacred number to get a free aspiring champion was hardly game breaking, but it was damn cool. The marks thing was really only an issue for things like havocs, because basic csm with a mark of nurgle were plague marines anyway back then. 

If legion supplements would be made, there isn't much they could do beyond some wargear and a different warlord trait table. The units won't be changed, neither will the point values. Although I must admit sethis's idea on changing what the marks do for different units would be a damn good place to start, even if its borderline wish listing. Good ideas regardless.


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

5tonsledge said:


> Don't bother Kiro is a lost cause. Half the stuff he says doesn't make sense


How am I a lost cause? I'm simply saying that why should chaos get 4 supplements so you write on your army list 'world eaters' or whatever?
And I was saying that having 4 codex's is very different to having individual legion rules, and it's not fair, but there the fan boys so...
And lots if armies have different chapters or warband or fleets, with different personalities, intact every army does, but none of them crying on the Internet that they need tons of supplements and tons of different rules for every occasion!
They just paint them differently, and use certain squads over others, and their imagination, the games moved on, move with it, it's what every body else does


----------



## 5tonsledge (May 31, 2010)

Lost cause


----------



## Ravner298 (Jun 3, 2011)

Wait kiro, you're saying its not fair/asking too much for chaos to have 4 supplements to go with 1 codex to represent major legions, but its perfectly ok for SM to have the vanilla codex with chapter traits for what, 5-6 legions, ontop of separate codex's for ba, sw, da etc? 

Your argument about "all the other books have unique legions and they make do" isn't the point. They didn't have set rules and wargear at one point, to be taken away at another.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Credit has to go to Straken's Fist for that one, not me!


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

I never said it was fair for smerfs did I?


----------



## iamtheeviltwin (Nov 12, 2012)

Sethis said:


> Plus the new legion specific rules in the upcoming Vanilla dex, which gives army wide special abilities to every other legion.


The "rumored" Chapter Tactics system for Space Marines at its core is like a more limited Chaos Mark systems with less flexibility. The current CSM book is one of the most customizible books out right now, note I am not talking about all options being "competitive", but highly flexible.

Compare the CSM mark, icon, cult troop, wargear system for making a force to the "rumored" SM Chapter Tactics system. While I like the idea of having special rules for the flavor of army I play (White Scars) I am going to be locked into a particular playstyle with my marines. I can't mix and match Chapter Tactics to maximize the flexibility of my army (Iron Hands CT for my Devs, UM CT for my tacs, WS for my bikes, etc). I can't maximize my Chapter Tactics to enhance or change the role of my units, I am going to be locked into certain units to maximize the usage of my Chapter Tactics. There is very little flexibility in the system outside of the "rumored" ability to ally two different chapters together. I guess this does comes with the "official" GW stamp of approval because I have a Chapter Tactic called "White Scars".

Contrast with the current CSM book. You can use the marks, icons, etc to recreate an all World Eaters army. A Khorne marked Terminator Squad with Icon of Wrath armed for CC is no less a "World Eater" because they aren't called Cult Marines just paint them red and do a head swap/conversion on the model and *bam* WE terminators (just like painting my marines White and Red suddently makes them White Scars as opposed to UM). Same goes with Death Guard, Emporer's Children, and Thousand Sons. The other traitor legions can also be done with creative unit selection, painting, and use of marks, icons, and "re-named" special characters. Throw in the allies rules and your options for representing your favorite warbands and legions are endless. The only thing you seem to be missing is the "official" GW stamp called "Alpha Legion" or "Thousand Sons".

I guess you can think being given a relatively open sand-box to play with in the form of a Codex that has very few limitations in force composition and can represent almost any legion from the background as being a "kick in the groin". It just doesn't look that way to me.


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

iamtheeviltwin said:


> The "rumored" Chapter Tactics system for Space Marines at its core is like a more limited Chaos Mark systems with less flexibility. The current CSM book is one of the most customizible books out right now, note I am not talking about all options being "competitive", but highly flexible.
> 
> Compare the CSM mark, icon, cult troop, wargear system for making a force to the "rumored" SM Chapter Tactics system. While I like the idea of having special rules for the flavor of army I play (White Scars) I am going to be locked into a particular playstyle with my marines. I can't mix and match Chapter Tactics to maximize the flexibility of my army (Iron Hands CT for my Devs, UM CT for my tacs, WS for my bikes, etc). I can't maximize my Chapter Tactics to enhance or change the role of my units, I am going to be locked into certain units to maximize the usage of my Chapter Tactics. There is very little flexibility in the system outside of the "rumored" ability to ally two different chapters together. I guess this does comes with the "official" GW stamp of approval because I have a Chapter Tactic called "White Scars".
> 
> ...


Exactly what I've TRYING to say this whole time


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Damn double post.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

iamtheeviltwin said:


> The "rumored" Chapter Tactics system for Space Marines at its core is like a more limited Chaos Mark systems with less flexibility. The current CSM book is one of the most customizible books out right now, note I am not talking about all options being "competitive", but highly flexible.


Striking to the heart of the issue, a lot of Chaos players don't seem to want flexibility. They want that all-across-the-army flavour that Chapter Tactics provides. For example someone who wants a flavourful way to represent Death Guard isn't interested in being able to mark different units to different gods. Death Guard = Mark of Nurgle all round. Nurgle Havocs, Nurgle Bikers, Nurgle Spawn... et al.

The flexibility only really fits with Undivided Legions or Warbands who are less mono-god. If you don't collect one of those armies then in order to make something flavourful you're reduced to marking everything the same way - which often offers little to no benefit for the units in question. For example basic CSM don't exactly benefit from a 6++ - especially considering the points they have to pay to even gain access to it. So you're sacrificing efficiency in order to be "fluffy" which is a dilemma that frustrates a lot of players.

You say "more limited" to which I reply "more flavourful". I'm happy sacrificing flexibility in order to have every model in my Raven Guard army benefit from Stealth, because it benefits most the units I'm already taking in order to be fluffy - i.e. Scouts, Land Speeders and Jump Infantry. I can still take other units if I want to, they just might gain less benefit. The reason why I'm happy with that is because_ it's the reason I collect the army in the first place._ I_ like_ the theme of striking from the shadows with fast moving infantry and vehicles before fading away to avoid retaliation. So the "limitations" on me don't matter in the slightest because it's rewarding me for playing the way the legion is designed to, and the way I want to.

At the moment it seems to be "Flexibility or Flavour, pick one" and while different people will value each property differently, the Chaos Dex doesn't satisfy the Flavour requirements, even if you wanted to take that route.


----------



## iamtheeviltwin (Nov 12, 2012)

Sethis said:


> At the moment it seems to be "Flexibility or Flavour, pick one" and while different people will value each property differently, the Chaos Dex doesn't satisfy the Flavour requirements, even if you wanted to take that route.


I guess this is where I think the breakdown in some of these player's creativity is. The "flavor" of the army is entirely based around playstyle and the painting and modelling. The marks allow you to further customize the army to fulfill a particular playstyle. For example, if you don't want to use the Mark of Nurgle to represent the extra toughness from bionics and other dark arts the Iron Warriors use on themselves because it is called "Mark of Nurgle" and not "Iron Legion Bionics"...this is you limiting yourself, not the codex writer who has given you a big sandbox to play with.

See my linked Harlequin army for an example of a flavorful Eldar army that is using the bog standard codex. I have intentionally limited the options in the army and built a playstyle around the "flavor" of Harlequins. The army is close combat and foot oriented with some long range support to aid the CC troops getting to where they need to be. I would love to see a specific codex (and I would kill for a "Mark of the Laughing God") to apply to my army, but it isn't there. Instead of lamenting the fact that I can't use looted vehicles, neuro-disrupters, fully shreiker equipped Dark Jester units, and cause fear and terror in my opponents with my masks. I could have easily thrown up my hands and complain that my codex lacks the "flavor" of my particular sub-faction of Eldar, but instead embraced the codex and use it to represent the general playstyle of the army on the table top. This was an army that existed from RT, was removed, and now (like many of the legions) is only represented in the codex by a single troop entry.

Not one of my opponents or myself doubts the flavor of my army. Just as no one would doubt the "flavor" of a (theoretical) Night Lord army that uses units of Warp Talons, Raptors, CSM with "MoS" (to represent their "pre-cog" abilities and their ability to strike first at cowering targets), Huron (to infiltrate a number of strike units, ie Terror tactics), Noise Marines (pinning weapons to represent psychological warfare)...all done in midnight blue with bat wings on their heads.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

I agree, you *can* build a flavourful army using the Chaos book. The thing is, you're having to use an awful lots of "Counts as" in order to get the effects you want. This, although hardly crippling, isn't ideal either.

For example, my favourite Chaos Legion (that I used to play in 3rd Ed) was Alpha Legion.

Now, if I was to build that army again, I could use Ahriman to infiltrate D3 units, use large numbers of Cultists, and a sprinkling of other CSM units. Painted and modelled appropriately, that'd be fine.

However Alpha Legion are not renowned for their ML4 Psykers, and I don't really want to spend 200+pts on a bad special character simply because he's the only reliable way to get that Warlord trait. Likewise none of my stuff is going to get Marked (unless it's a "hired in" unit of Cult Troops) because I'm Undivided, therefore a lot of my choices are frankly rather dull in regards to special rules or in-game effects. Given that I'm one of the major first founding Legions I may well question why we didn't get something as simple as:

- Chosen may be attached to Cultist squads in the same way as Wolf Guard.
- Enemy reserves are at -1 due to sabotage.
- "I am Alpharius!": A challenge may be answered (but not issued) by any member of a CSM unit, instead of only models with the Character special rule.
- Cult Units may never be taken as Troops, even if you have a Lord with the relevant mark.

None of the above rules are particularly groundbreaking or paradigm altering, but they add a nice little bit of flavour to distinguish me from, say, Black Legion, without relying on "Counts as" or specific special characters that may or may not fit in with my fluff. And, to be fair, you could easily have a little set of rules like that for every Legion and it wouldn't have taken up more than two pages.

So the point isn't "You can't make a Legion-specific army from the Chaos book", but rather "Given how easy it could have been to include rules for it (as evidenced by the upcoming SM codex), don't CSM have a valid reason for being upset over their absence?" Because it seems at the moment that you have to almost fight, or exploit, the codex in order to hammer it into the shape of a given legion, rather than the codex helping you to do so, which is what it should have done all along.


----------



## iamtheeviltwin (Nov 12, 2012)

Sethis said:


> So the point isn't "You can't make a Legion-specific army from the Chaos book", but rather "Given how easy it could have been to include rules for it (as evidenced by the upcoming SM codex), don't CSM have a valid reason for being upset over their absence?"


We will see how "easy" it is once the codex drops and the real dissection of the rules begins. Without the full picture we are already hearing whining about which is more powerful or that this CT poaches on that one. Fortunately the SM codex will never really be "top tier" easy mode and a few broken CT will just put them on even footing with some of the other "top" codexes.

As for the rest of your post. I agree it would be nice to have those specific rules they make things easier, but at the same time they limit you to one person (the codex writer's) opinion of how to play X legion. I prefer the flexibility and using counts-as myself to strict doctrines, but I understand many do not.

It does look like legion specific rules will be coming via the Codex supplements. The BL, Iyanden, and Farsight rules were all fluffy based and none of them groundbreaking, but they did create a different playstyle and feel for each army. All will be revealed in time and I know there have been rumors of SM supplements, but I would not be surprised if this new codex pushes the need for SM supplements on the back burner while the other factions see more coming sooner.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Sethis said:


> So the point isn't "You can't make a Legion-specific army from the Chaos book", but rather "Given how easy it could have been to include rules for it (as evidenced by the upcoming SM codex), don't CSM have a valid reason for being upset over their absence?" Because it seems at the moment that you have to almost fight, or exploit, the codex in order to hammer it into the shape of a given legion, rather than the codex helping you to do so, which is what it should have done all along.


The reason is that 3.5ed did this, and look how that worked out. A shitload of Iron Warriors players and nobody using any of the other legions. Until GW learn to balance, they will not bring Legions back and I believe this is the correct way to go about it.

Were the Codex to introduce Legion rules, one Legion would be more powerful than the others (that's the way of the game, sadly), and then all the other Legion players would either bitch about how GW hates them and screwed over their Legion or they'll quietly repaint all their models, then claim to be a stalwart Word Bearer/World Eater/Thousand Son or whatever, just like 3.5.

Midnight


----------



## Iron_Freak220 (Nov 8, 2009)

That's not entirely true Midnight.

Look at Space Wolves and Grey Knights as examples. When they came out they were very powerful and a lot of people switched to them, just like you said. But did every space marine player repaint their army grey or silver? Most definitely not. Did Space Marine players complain that the the Wolves and Knights were way too good compared to theirs? A few did, to be sure, but not in even close to the same magnitude that CSM players felt slighted. This is because, I feel, SM players were happy with their codecies because of the ability it gave them to represent their desired armies.

So I think that if one Legion's rules turned out to be the most powerful then competitive CSM players would probably build their armies around that, but the other CSM players would be content because they finally had a rule system that represented their beloved Legions.


Also just puttin it out there: I played World Eaters in 3.5, not Iron Warriors. Most of my collection is Berzerkers. Talk about feeling slighted :laugh:


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

Frankly iron warriors weren't the most abusive thing in the 3.5 codex. I played iron warriors since 2nd ed and never used the 3.5 iron warriors' rules because I wanted to use daemons.

Okay, let's dispel something right here and now. Iron Warriors were NOT the only reason why the codex was broken.
The codex was broken because marking havocs for a god other than undivided or different from the general made them elites. Therefore you could use 3 elite slots for havocs and then take 3 more heavy support choices. Iron Warriors couldn't do this because it required using marks other than undivided.

Which is about as bad as the most abusive iron warriors build which was 3 obliterator cults and 4 heavy supports.


----------



## notsoevil (Nov 30, 2010)

I'm new to 40k and Chaos Space Marines were my first choice.

I never played in 5th edition or prior, save for a demo game here and there.

But I've always been enamored with the fluff of Chaos (Nurgle in particular).

And this situation is easy to sum up for me: The CSM codex was just weak from a design standpoint in how they were treated. I'm not talking power-level. I'm talking the lazy approach to handling their variety as compared to the Space Marines codex that is coming soon.

There's no reason the CSM codex shouldn't have been just as detailed, varied and in depth as the new SM codex. The conventions of traits, chapter differences, characters and so forth should have all been mirrored for CSM.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

notsoevil said:


> I'm new to 40k and Chaos Space Marines were my first choice.
> 
> I never played in 5th edition or prior, save for a demo game here and there.
> 
> ...


:goodpost:

While I converted over to the Chaos Gods around mid-late 5th, I too have never played with anything other than the 4th & 6th ed codexs.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

It always struck me as an odd coincidence that on the release of the 3.5ed codex everyone had an iron warrior army...I wonder why...other than requiring no talent to paint


----------



## Squire (Jan 15, 2013)

It feels so over the top dedicating an entire codex to Black Legion, which presumably means they'll have to do another four for the other undivided first founding chapters. Something like the old Craftworld Eldar codex including rules for BL, IW, WB, NL and AL would have been perfect. A single codex, five first founding chapters taken care of, job done.


----------



## Firewolf (Jan 22, 2007)

>>ts maybe been said, but why could they not just give each Legion a character, like they did/do with loyalist. Ok, UM get 4 but...! A named Apostle for WB, a named Champion for NL etc. Then give each character an ability that effects army ie chapter traits. Seems simple enough an idea to me.:shok:


----------



## Squire (Jan 15, 2013)

Firewolf said:


> >>ts maybe been said, but why could they not just give each Legion a character, like they did/do with loyalist. Ok, UM get 4 but...! A named Apostle for WB, a named Champion for NL etc. Then give each character an ability that effects army ie chapter traits. Seems simple enough an idea to me.:shok:


I suppose so, but I'd rather just have whatever trait they introduce as an option by itself. I always like customising a character to fit a vision I have for my leader, and wouldn't want to have to take a pre-made character just because I want legion specific rules. For the purposes of building a fluffy list it's like giving with one hand and taking away with the other


----------



## 5tonsledge (May 31, 2010)

Stella Cadente said:


> It always struck me as an odd coincidence that on the release of the 3.5ed codex everyone had an iron warrior army...I wonder why...other than requiring no talent to paint


There's always talent involved in painting regardless of metallic schemes. Metalics are of course easier than most because dry brushing is a novice painters best friend shit I still do it when I'm painting other peoples units for cheap. But there still is steps in making dry brushed models look good prime, base coat , wash, layer 1 dry brush, layer 2 highlight dry brush, and layer 3 extra dry brush high light edges. A lot of the power gamers who played IW might have done a piss poor dry brush of bolt gun metal and slapped on gold trim that was brush streaked and thick. Lazy pricks wouldn't even attempt hazard stripes most of the time. I personally was Iron Warriors fanboy before ever playing the game. My cousin played them in 2nd and then in 3.5, 5th, and 6th ed codex. Ive had an Iron warriors army since 4/5th , but eventually switched to my true chaos love" Emperor's Children".


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

Firewolf said:


> >>ts maybe been said, but why could they not just give each Legion a character, like they did/do with loyalist. Ok, UM get 4 but...! A named Apostle for WB, a named Champion for NL etc. Then give each character an ability that effects army ie chapter traits. Seems simple enough an idea to me.:shok:


You already do- abaddon, lucius, typhus and karne, same but for the gods instead- chaos' focus


----------



## Nordicus (May 3, 2013)

Don't forget Ahriman!


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

Nordicus said:


> Don't forget Ahriman!


Exacty


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Firewolf said:


> >>ts maybe been said, but why could they not just give each Legion a character, like they did/do with loyalist. Ok, UM get 4 but...! A named Apostle for WB, a named Champion for NL etc. Then give each character an ability that effects army ie chapter traits. Seems simple enough an idea to me.:shok:


Lords give Troops unlocks, and so you can do any legion. You can take 30 Raptors if you have a huge Night Lords Raptor boner, you can take 6 Daemon Engines if you've got an Iron Boner, you can ally in Daemons if you've got a religious boner etc.

The Codex is fluffy without you having to buy an overpriced supplement. Sure, you can't make a super-fluffy representation of the Alpha Legion as it appears in the book _Legion_, but you can't make a true-to-fluff Space Marine army due to the difference in power levels between rules and fluff either, so stop whinging.

Midnight


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

You can't rule in sabotage really- take stealth suits; almost never, if ever, see frontline action; they are always behind enemy line, blowing up supply and reinforcement convoys. Or blowing up enemy aircraft in their airbases to ease the tau's battle for air supremacy, scare tactics, like popping up, blowing up a tank, spraying a infantry formation, you know, no frontline action, but you can't fairly represent that- what could you have? For ever stealth squad you own your opponent loses one random unit because it/it's transport either got blown up or ran of fuel?
Fluffy, different, ludicrously OPed- like chaos wants


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

Meh like all the codecies GW tends to screwed up the internal balance, sometimes to the point that only idiots end up running certain choices (Which is sad because I personally like all the units in the book). I mean with 20pt bikers, and helldrakes who would take mutalators, or possessed in a tournament. Hell the defiler is generally agreed upon as a overpriced blinged up piece of AV12 garbage. 

Still shit happens, and although it is true that other books have better internal balance leading to more diversity of play I ultimately will continue to play my CSM's for as long as the hobby exists. Besides chaos has enough diversity that there is always a way to deal with the idiots that swarm to the new books. My personal favorite is smashing IG drop armies to mist with havoks/quad gun.


----------



## Veteran Sergeant (May 17, 2012)

5tonsledge said:


> ????????????????????? 4 space marine codex's i guess no body else has any legion spec rules eh. God bro


So the Chaos book may not let you create the army you _want_. Well, welcome to being a Space Marine player, to be honest. There's actually not that much more flexibility in the four Space Marine books than there is in the Chaos book. Blood Angels are Codex Space Marines with angry and faster vehicles. All four books are built around the same basic units, and they really aren't that exciting. And just like C:CSM, quite a few of them are overcosted, or just plain don't perform. How many times have you seen Vanguard Vets?

But look at the troops. Something a lot of players in here are griping about. A Chaos Space Marine Squad has 26 different options to it. A Dark Angel Tactical Squad (since CA is the only 6th Ed Marine codex out right now)? 11. So even if you add in 9 more Chapter Traits, the Tactical Squad still has less options than a Chaos Marine Squad. What exactly is it that Space Marine players are getting that Chaos players are not again? To mix and match Chapter Rules or units, the Space Marine player has to juggle FOCs and ally matrices. The Chaos Player? Pay 3 points per model in some cases.

There are plenty of arguments about which codex is better in terms of its internal balance and power level. But the idea that Space Marines have all these great options and Chaos doesn't is a complete myth, and nothing more than the typical griping and whining done by players of any 40K faction. Maybe the option you like sucks, rules wise. Well, like I said, welcome to being a Marine player. What if I want to create a Space Marine Chapter that bases its formations around Tactical Squads optimized for surgical strikes and close in fighting, but I still want it to be more or less a Codex Chapter? I'm not finding that in Codex: Space Marines. I'm buying unwanted units from C:SW and C:SM so I can create some weird hybrid list that instant causes people to accuse me of trying to list optimize and codex hop, and it still doesn't really represent what I want it to, but it might be a reasonable facsimile. If I want to do that with a Chaos army, I'm "Any Chaos Space Marine may take a close combat weapon" for 2 points, lol.


But really, the reason why there are four-five Space Marine books and only one Chaos book is sales. Even when Chaos was "overpowered" with the 3.5 Codex, they still didn't sell as many models as the regular Space Marines.

Ultimately, everything that happens in 40K is to drive sales of plastic toy soldiers. The Space Marines get more rules because they sell more figures, not the other way around. I'm not saying it is "right" or "fair" because right and fair are somewhat irrelevant. It's like the Sisters fans complaining that it isn't fair they've never gotten another real codex. Well, Sisters got two codex books, and never sold enough models to justify tying up design assets like writers, artists and sculptors to make new ones, because the ROI on making the next Space Marine codex and model release made more sense. 

This is most likely the problem for Chaos. They have plenty of fluff that could be expanded into rules and models, but rules and models don't just create themselves. I'm an old school Chaos player. From back in the days when the fluff behind the Alpha Legion was still cool, and not a ludicrous faction of James Bond Marines who spend time doing everything _except_ being Space Marines.

But like it was mentioned earlier, the Chaos book is still fairly chocked with options. Sure, not all of the options are that good, but that's _every_ codex. Given that the original Legions no longer really exist, having "Chapter tactics" is somewhat irrelevant to their fluff. Their "Chapter Tactics" are instead represented by the marks of their Chaos Gods. Chaos Marines aren't supposed to be directly analogous to loyal Space Marines. Loyal Marines have the manufacturing capability of a vast interstellar empire behind them. The Imperium might be failing, but it's failing _very slowly_, and it's vast. Chaos Marines, on the other hand, get the boons and whims of supernatural forces. They are two entirely different armies, with just a superficial aesthetic in common, and an intertwined back story. But the modern Chaos Marine is one of two things. A Warp twisted lunatic who serves at the behest of some insidious greater power. Or, a bitter, dogged renegade waging a guerrilla war against the far larger and superior might of the Imperium. 

From a fluff standpoint, there are dramatic differences too.

The Space Marines have an giant, exhaustive book which is an authoritative tome on all things Space Marine, with the perfected processes for recruiting, indoctrinating, and training Marines, as well as countless and exhaustive studies on how to fight battles, written by the greatest military mind ever to live. They have Chapter Tactics because they have very long standing and entrenched ways of fighting and an exhaustive training regimen which ensures those skills are passed on to all Marines.

Chaos Marines have... whatever training it is that they decide to do. Remember, the Legions came from an inferior stock of Space Marines compared to the modern ones (small gene defficiencies excluded). The Marines of the Great Crusade were mass produced, with varying degrees of quality. Many of them weren't even actual Space Marines, but instead enhanced regular humans. When they lost at Terra, they were disorganized, scattered to the winds and hunted down. Before long, at least two of the Legions completely ceased to exist as an organized entity. 

So complaining that there aren't "Legion Tactics" is somewhat pointless. There are no Legions anymore. Most of the Heresy era Chaos Marines have died or transcended to demon status. What is left of the Chaos Legions are splintered into countless warbands, often intermixed with followers of different gods, and Marines from different parent Legions. Their numbers get bolstered with recruits created with stolen or corrupted geneseed, and formed with debased processes and Chaos taint. I think really, what has happened is there is a disconnect between some Chaos players, and what the Chaos Marine faction actually _is_. The book _tells you_ there are no Legions left. The book _tells you_ that Chaos is mostly made up of fractured, hodge-podge warbands led by a particularly powerful Champion.


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

I am still in two minds about it:

I do like the chaos codex as it is. The variety of builds is excellent IMO: Plague Zombies, Daemon Engines, very strong fast attack choices (bikers, heldrakes, raptors) and cultist blobs, or combine them all. 

On the other hand, it could be even better and expand on the 4 mono-god legions more. Mono-god builds are limited, despite the overall codex flexibility. 
As someone else mentioned, if you have a hard on for Night Lords, you can take 30 Raptors, or if you like Iron Warriors you have a decent number of Daemon Engines to pick from, or if you like 1ksons you can take...well, 1ksons as troops...However, with a little extra effort and some tweaks they could've given us Raptors as scoring units if playing Night Lords, or some 1ksons Havoc units or extra options. 

It is a very good codex, but could've been even better in this respect.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

I actually like the codex as it is, yes there are several things that I would like to see changed rule wise (the Defiler is damn near top of the list IMO), and if the option to see a "chapter traits" equivalent for the major unaligned legions I would welcome it; mainly because playing any of those factions are rather "dry".

What I am disappointed in with the new codex is the lack of new units/re-sculpts, and cool models (no The DinoBots, even the flying one, do not count - they are not nice, but not awesome enough). Yes cultists are nice, but without a box of their own and without an option for a dedicated transport - seriously am I the only one who feels that cultists driving half-tracks be awesome?

----

*continues to bitch into a state of ramblings*


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Straken's_Fist said:


> 1ksons Havoc units or extra options.


Erm... 4+ invulns, Fearless and Slow and Purposeful? That strikes me as a tad too powerful on a unit armed with purely Heavy Weapons, since SnP has essentially no downside. Give them a Psyker as their squad leader? None of the Tzeentch powers are any good, especially on a Havoc Squad, and if you give them rulebook access they get either some shitty power from Telepathy, or Divination and become waaaay too good.



Fallen said:


> What I am disappointed in with the new codex is the lack of new units/re-sculpts, and cool models (no The DinoBots, even the flying one, do not count - they are not nice, but not awesome enough). Yes cultists are nice, but without a box of their own and without an option for a dedicated transport - seriously am I the only one who feels that cultists driving half-tracks be awesome?


Cultists with vehicles is pretty much Imperial Guard without Heavy Weapons or Flyers, so I'm not quite sure why you would ever use them rather than ally in Imperial Guard. CSM got some totally new units, like Warp Talons and Daemon Engines and Dark Apostles and Warpsmiths and Cultists, but in a way, Lords, Spawn, Noise Marines, Daemon Princes, Sorcerors, Raptors, Bikers, and Havocs are all new units as well, because they changed so hugely. Apart from the 1/10 chance that someone actually brought Gift of Chaos, how many times did you see Spawn in 5th? Chaos Lords? Noise Marines? They have all been given a significant boost and a big change in how they're used (in the case of Spawn, the change is _whether_ they're used). Raptors have become a viable choice. Havocs are worth taking now.

Same as Dark Angels, who didn't really gain all that much (2 shitty planes, a 150pt Land Speeder, an awful Special Character, some 'elite' Bikes and Terminators), but changed hugely as they changed from being 'Codex: Deathwing' to 'Codex: Dark Angels' - they can know run Terminators, Bikes and Marines, the latter two as entire armies if you wish.

I can't think of any army update that got a huge resculpt or wave of new models; maybe Tau? Even then it was more the dynamic change of the army that made them so different to their previous incarnation (Fire Warriors becoming worth it over Kroot).

Midnight


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

I agree that cultists should of got a box set, big ball drop that one


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

MidnightSun said:


> Erm... 4+ invulns, Fearless and Slow and Purposeful? That strikes me as a tad too powerful on a unit armed with purely Heavy Weapons, since SnP has essentially no downside. Give them a Psyker as their squad leader? None of the Tzeentch powers are any good, especially on a Havoc Squad, and if you give them rulebook access they get either some shitty power from Telepathy, or Divination and become waaaay too good.


Not sure where you think I said "give them 4++, Fearless, or Slow and Purposeful.", because I didn't...I guess we'll just chalk it down to you disagreeing with everything I say on every single thread I post in and having some sort of vendetta lol... 

Seriously now though, as I have said a hundred times now just as an example, 1ksons Havocs with some unique rules would've been quite easy. Make them all psykers and/or have access to stuff like psycannon-type weapons. Some other than "yay, Rubrics with S+P, 4++ and ap3 boltguns." 

I am not really overly bothered though, as I have said I do not dislike the codex. Quite the opposite. So cannot really be bothered to discuss it anymore as I do not care enough and it isn't going to change anything: We might get some supplements, they might even be good, but I doubt it, so meh...


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Straken's_Fist said:


> Not sure where you think I said "give them 4++, Fearless, or Slow and Purposeful.", because I didn't...I guess we'll just chalk it down to you disagreeing with everything I say on every single thread I post in and having some sort of vendetta lol...


I said that because that's the only thing GW have done to distinguish Thousand Sons from regular CSM apart from give them Inferno Bolts, and Havocs with Inferno Bolts isn't even worth imagining. Tzeentch, on the table top, is represented by Invulnerable Saves and Psychic Powers. That's just how it works. Do the Thousand Sons even _have_ Havocs any more? Can a Rubric Marine wield a Heavy Weapon? If they can, why do they not carry squad-based heavy weaponry? If you want to field a fluffy army, don't field Havocs at all, rather than try to make Rubric Havocs.



Straken's_Fist said:


> Seriously now though, as I have said a hundred times now just as an example, 1ksons Havocs with some unique rules would've been quite easy. Make them all psykers and/or have access to stuff like psycannon-type weapons. Some other than "yay, Rubrics with S+P, 4++ and ap3 boltguns."


Psycannon type weapons? Noise Marines have those, in the form of Sonic Blasters and Blastmasters. Making them all Psykers, or giving them Brotherhood of Sorcerors? I don't see how that works - you give them anything but Divination and it's meaningless, you give them Divination and they rock. You give them their own psychic power, maybe psycannon-like weapons, and... wait. You just want Grey Knight Purgation Squads, don't you?

Midnight


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

MidnightSun said:


> ... wait. You just want Grey Knight Purgation Squads, don't you?


Oh yeah I just love Grey Knights being a CSM/Daemon player...Ever since 2nd edition I just wanted my Chaos to be like Grey Knights! lol....I Love you Midnight, I really do.


----------



## Iron_Freak220 (Nov 8, 2009)

Maybe not a psycannon but maybe a heavy bolter that fires inferno bolts. Easy peasy.

Give Death Guard Havocs a poisoned torrent flamer.

Give Emperors Children Havocs blast masters or a new sonic variation.

Give World Eaters Havocs some sort of Assault Cannon that actually has Assault as its weapon type rather than heavy.


Give Thousand Son Chosen a close combat weapon that turns models into Spawn.

Give Death Guard Chosen a close combat weapon with poisoned and possibly a rule similar to entropic strike.

Give Emperors children Chosen a close combat weapon that increases initiative and attacks, maybe shred

Give World Eaters an axe. Any 6 allows additional attacks, etc.


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

Why do you need different weapons to be different? Whats wrong with a different paint scheme, marks, options taken, imagination?


----------



## iamtheeviltwin (Nov 12, 2012)

kiro the avenger! said:


> *imagination*?


qft


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

Well, i'll be honest with you.

After a long conversation today with a friend I have actually changed my opinion. I am finding myself agreeing with you Kiro...

The brutal truth is that we have actually all become lazy due to forums. Forums are a nice way of sharing the hobby and I understand the irony I am posting this on a forum...But, they have stunned creativity in the game. So many people now just copy/paste lists from online without questioning what they are reading and crucially without having any creativity...Have we got to the stage now where we are incapable of being creative and instead demand supplements for every single faction we like? It would seem so. 

Chaos Codex gives us the tools to do this. Yes, some of the marks are flawed, but who the fuck cares, when with a bit of creativity one can easily work around this??...
Don't want tzeentch marked Havocs squad? Take Noise Marines and model them as Thousand Sons Havocs then...Or Oblits. Or vice versa. 

Same thing is happening with the C:SM rumoured rulesets: People are crying as if it's the end of the world because BT's are being integrated, because Centurions look crap...Well, friggin' kitbash them if you don't like them...Be creative..... And besides, we have only seen them in pretty unflattering photos so far (bright yellow/blue isn't exactly photogenic) and with limited builds, so no one has had a chance to look at what else you can do with the kits yet...
As for BT's...Do they really need a separate codex? Is it even possible, in a 40k that is very different to fantasy in spaaace that it was back in the 90's...? No, it isn't. So basically, it's tweak them or die...Dark Angels kind of 'stole' the Knights in Spaaaaace fluff from BT's slowly over the years anyway (From Native Americans to Knights in spaaace in about a decade)...And besides, if none of the 4 original chaos legions don't need a separate supplement let alone codex, why would BT need one? Seems C:SM is taking a leaf from the Chaos codex and doing an integrated approach, which I feel is rather clever. Just replace chapter tactics with marks of chaos and you have the ability to field very different armies with different playstyles (Nurgle = slow but tough Slaanesh fast good close combat, Tzeentch = like the magicks vs Iron Hands = If you like Mech White Scars = biker armies Black Templars = if you dig challenges and assault in a shooty game), with the same end result.


----------



## Stella Cadente (Dec 25, 2006)

kiro the avenger! said:


> Why do you need different weapons to be different? Whats wrong with a different paint scheme, marks, options taken, imagination?


You seriously think the average player has the ability to use imagination?, chaos players are the worst for it, they have none, or refuse to ever use any, they need everything done for them, they cannot use their brain, It's too busy moaning


----------



## Achaylus72 (Apr 30, 2011)

Stella Cadente said:


> You seriously think the average player has the ability to use imagination?, chaos players are the worst for it, they have none, or refuse to ever use any, they need everything done for them, they cannot use their brain, It's too busy moaning


I hate to say it but, you are correct, you have no idea at the amount of whinging i have read of Chaos Players that can't seem to get the idea that you can actually create your own fucking Chaos Army and augment it anyway you want.

Also is it me or that it seems 99% of Chaos Armies are either Khorne or Nurgle.

I can tell you that you don't get to build a 27,000 point Chaos army without imagination, i have designed my own version of Chosen, i have added Chaos Ogres (my Bonecrushers of Achaylus), i have designed my own version of Justaerin Terminators from Chaos Terminator Lords as a retinue for Abaddon, I am adding Deathshrouds to accompany Typhus (They are called Mortarion Guard), i have designed my own version of Enhanced Warriors for Fabius Bile, again i have added a Fallen Angels company for Cypher.

Also if you want an all plastic Thousand Sons unit, simply strip off all Khorne iconography from Berzerkers and paint them Blue and Yellow, or in my case my Bonecrushers of Achaylus Livery.

Chaos gives anyone with an ounce of imagination a whole fucking galaxy of options.

I am Achaylus Bonecrusher and i approve of this message.


----------



## Nordicus (May 3, 2013)

Stella Cadente said:


> You seriously think the average player has the ability to use imagination?, chaos players are the worst for it, they have none, or refuse to ever use any, they need everything done for them, they cannot use their brain, It's too busy moaning


You feel better now that you got it out of your system? Can we move on from the ignorant generalization please? Thank you.

Now moving on.

I've always been under the impression that the codexes we get are the basic guidelines - This is how the army works at it's basics. How you wish to sculpt, alter or paint your models to follow your fluff is up to you as a player and as a collector. Personally I've always loved the Black Legion and naturally I find it interesting that there now is a codex surrounding them.

Will I use it? Sure, why not. Would I complain if I didn't get it? Nope, as it's minor additions. It might as well have been in a White Dwarf magazine with "Oh by the by, now you can do this!".

It looks to me like people need to take a step back and look at things from another perspective. The groundwork is laid out before you, but nothing is keeping you from trying out different things. You have your marks to play with, you have color themes, you have elite units, lords, sorcerers, daemon princes, characters and whatnot, that can be customized fully to embody your fluff.

Honestly, do we really need more from the official codex? Don't we have plenty to make the army that we need, in the cult following that we wish? 

The one thing I notice, is that many refer to the SM codexes and the fact that they get unique traits per chapter. One thing that it seems it forgotten, is that SM doesn't have near the same customization as CSM have in terms of marks and icons, not to mention rewards. They need the chapter traits to have the same options as we do. We have the ability to mix'n'match our troops with abilities like they never have, and this is a way for the SM to have something similar to that.

Call me naive if you wish, or a simpleminded optimist; But honestly I think the CSM codex, even without supplements, are completely fine in terms of fluff and the ability to make the legion you wish. 

That's my 2 cents.


----------



## neferhet (Oct 24, 2012)

The amount of trolling in this thread is too damn high.


----------



## Straken's_Fist (Aug 15, 2012)

neferhet said:


> The amount of trolling in this thread is too damn high.


yeah. Obvious troll is obvious though.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Let's drag the discussion back to the topic at hand and leave the Trolls to the Billy Goats Gruff shall we?


----------



## Haskanael (Jul 5, 2011)

Straken's_Fist said:


> yeah. Obvious troll is obvious though.


as is often the case of trolls.


but I do agree there is not much creativity in the armies of chaos marines. and as stated lists are becoming more and more the same as well wich is kind of boring/a crying shame


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

Haskanael said:


> but I do agree there is not much creativity in the armies of chaos marines. and as stated lists are becoming more and more the same as well wich is kind of boring/a crying shame


Which is no fault of the book


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

Achaylus72 said:


> Also is it me or that it seems 99% of Chaos Armies are either Khorne or Nurgle.


Theres a reason for this though. If you want to be competitive in small scale games these are for the most part the best marks to take

Not so long back I went through the Chaos dex and if you actually look at the units and marks sheer numbers Nurgle then Khorne are the best.

Slaanesh is better on Raptors and Warp Talons IMO, though again not by much and both khorne and nurgle could be more useful depending if your playing against MeQ or xeno. 
Tzeentch only really useful for the deamonic troops, like oblits but still nurgle is likely a better choice to remove ID from the heavy weapons 
Reg marines and bikes nurgle stands out clear winner unless you take the crazy overpriced MoS banner of excess, but you won't because its overpriced and vulnerable 
Plague marines remain the best cult unit, which you will likely take as troops as nurgle makes your lord tougher, and he needs to be as hes always in challenges. Tzeentch would have been good here if the Sigil wasn't so expensive
Terminators you are either taking MoN or MoT as they will likely have unwieldy weapons so strike last MoS is useless other than LC termis and their rare.

The problem is that where as most marks are situational MoN is just a permanent benefit thats pretty much always useful regardless of who you play against, or the terrain set up or the mission. 

I say this as a person who hates nurgle, but you can't help it, players will pick the best mark they can and for tourni play that nurgle


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Barnster said:


> Plague marines remain the best cult unit, which you will likely take as troops as nurgle makes your lord tougher, and he needs to be as hes always in challenges. Tzeentch would have been good here if the Sigil wasn't so expensive
> Terminators you are either taking MoN or MoT as they will likely have unwieldy weapons so strike last MoS is useless other than LC termis and their rare


Disagree entirely that Plagues are the best Cult Troops. 5 Noise Marines with a Blastmaster is the best god damned Troops unit in the game for the points and damage output. Strength 8 AP3 blasts that ignore cover from extreme range (for anti-infantry) is capable of mulching anything but Land Raiders and Flyers. Anything else is at significant threat.

Midnight


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

But you can't make legion spefic with even better guns and stealth- so your argument is invalid


----------



## iamtheeviltwin (Nov 12, 2012)

Barnster said:


> Tzeentch only really useful for the deamonic troops, like oblits but still nurgle is likely a better choice to remove ID from the heavy weapons


If you break out the numbers, Nurgle is better for those troops against small arms and massed fire, Tzeentch is better for those troops against Low AP weapons. MoT also makes more difference against the best marine clearing weapon in the game, the baleflamer.



MidnightSun said:


> Disagree entirely that Plagues are the best Cult Troops. 5 Noise Marines with a Blastmaster is the best god damned Troops unit in the game for the points and damage output. Strength 8 AP3 blasts that ignore cover from extreme range (for anti-infantry) is capable of mulching anything but Land Raiders and Flyers. Anything else is at significant threat.


I think PM and NM are kind of a wash as "best" cult troop. They have different roles and NM are shooty as hell and with the Init bump can handle themselves against Marine assault troops. However, PM are great midfield/advance troops that can withstand enemy fire better and will destroy Giant Monsters and enemy characters with their plague knifes.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

iamtheeviltwin said:


> If you break out the numbers, Nurgle is better for those troops against small arms and massed fire, Tzeentch is better for those troops against Low AP weapons. MoT also makes more difference against the best marine clearing weapon in the game, the baleflamer.


Are you sure? I'm seeing a 33% reduction in wounds from a Baleflamer with Mark of Nurgle and 16% reduction in wounds from Mark of Tzeentch.



iamtheeviltwin said:


> I think PM and NM are kind of a wash as "best" cult troop. They have different roles and NM are shooty as hell and with the Init bump can handle themselves against Marine assault troops. However, PM are great midfield/advance troops that can withstand enemy fire better and will destroy Giant Monsters and enemy characters with their plague knifes.


I don't think Plagues will 'destroy' MCs and Characters any more than Noise Marines - sure, they're better against Monstrous Creatures in CC, but any decent monster is clearing out handfuls Plague Marines before they attack anyway, so it's a pretty moot point. A decent combat character is going to kill Plagues or Noise Marines, but Noise Marines have a pretty good chance of insta-killing him from 48" away with Blastmasters, so I'd disagree there too. Not that Plagues don't have their uses, but I think they've been surpassed by the sons of Slaanesh.

Midnight


----------



## iamtheeviltwin (Nov 12, 2012)

MidnightSun said:


> Are you sure? I'm seeing a 33% reduction in wounds from a Baleflamer with Mark of Nurgle and 16% reduction in wounds from Mark of Tzeentch.


You are correct on daemon units, the extra toughness helps better against the baleflamer. I did my original math with the weapon as S7. Although on non-daemon marines MoN and MoT is basically a wash against the baleflamer.


----------



## Achaylus72 (Apr 30, 2011)

I must clarrify something from my last post, i am purely a collector, i don't game anymore, i can't keep up with the new rules due to a medical reason (related to dimentia), but i love collecting and painting, and building armies.


----------

