Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
Page 1 of 2 • Share •
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2 
Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by Stormlord on Sun Sep 13, 2009 9:32 pm
just throwing this out there since we have some "former" chaos players with strongly held opinions on the subject. Oh and straight from Gav's own blog this is....
http://mechanicalhamster.wordpress.com/2009/09/10/differences-of-opinion/
Differences of Opinion
I’d like to take a digression to address some of the comments raised in the Signing News post, regarding decisions that were made on Codex: Chaos Space Marines. For those Hamsterites not familiar with the way the main Games Workshop games are structured, they consist of a core rulebook that that contains the rules for the game and a series of supplements that detail each of the individual armies that people can collect and game with (called Army Books for Warhammer, and Codexes for Warhammer 40,000).
To start with, let’s make one thing clear. Reasoned criticism of a work is one thing, attacks on the creator of that work are another. I’m fine with the first, I am not fine with the second, in any arena. The internet does not entitle somebody to conduct themselves without the usual consideration and manners I hope they would employ in other forms of communication. It is also too easy for some folks to forget that quite often they are expressing their opinion, not objective fact. It is entirely possible that other people have a different opinion, and it is usually of little use arguing opinions rather than explaining how those opinions were formed. I firmly believe that an informed opinion is far better than an uninformed one, even if that opinion differs from mine. I have had many players contact me or talk to me expressing their approval of the revised Codex: Chaos Space Marines and their preference for the approach that was taken. For example: http://bootae.ibforums.com/index.php?showtopic=10574
To that end, here’s some of the thinking behind the changes that were made. They were not done on a whim and the decisions were taken with some thought and consideration.
An army (and a Codex) are more than just a set of rules. In the scheme of things, rules come and go; they are an abstract mechanical representation of something else. The exact rules representation may change from edition to edition, but hopefully they fundamentally represent the same thing. The previous edition of the Codex was over-the-top on rules, trying to legislate for every eventuality on the tabletop and trying to represent in detail every aspect of a player’s miniature army.
This approach has two main problems. Firstly, it creates a mindset of false legitimacy. This isn’t just in gaming, it’s in wider society as well. Some people feel entitled to place all responsiblity on the rules-makers (or lawmakers…) with the argument, ‘Well, the rules say I can do it.’ This fundamentally diverts the choices a person makes onto somebody else, absolving them of blame (in their mind). By moving away from a set of rules that tries to legislate for every single possibility, and instead return to the original idea that these books are as much a guide to players as they are rulebooks, we sought to bring back both the responsiblity and the power for players to make the decisions for themselves. They are a framework for players to collect an army of miniature soldiers not a dictat on the way they must do so.
The second problem with this approach is at the opposite end of the scale. By having a minutiae of rules covering very detailed elements of a players army, it can also trigger the response, ‘I can’t do this because the rules don’t say I can’. By listing very specific allowances and restrictions, the old Codex essentially presented very narrow interpretations of the background, again removing the choice from the players. This is particularly the case with the Legions and Power-specific lists. While they did introduce some cool new options (which I’ll get back to later) the majority of those sub-lists were about restriction, not choice. It presented a very defined view of what was and was not possible in the vast galaxy of the 41st millenium. Some troop types never, ever appeared on the battlefield together according to the previous iteration of the rules. Some Legions never, ever used certain types of wargear. These restrictions removed lots of ‘What if…?’ situations, cementing a very rigid and literal interpretation of the background within the mechanics of collecting an army. They were unrepresentative of the anarchic and fluctuating nature of Chaos forces.
It is also important to consider the Codex in the context in which it was created – a broad platform for a typical Chaos Space Marines army. In both Warhammer and 40K, Chaos has always had an immensely diverse background, with many, many different troop types, war engines, characters and so forth. The decision was taken, as it was in Warhammer, that such diversity couldn’t be given a proper treatment in just a single volume. Rather than dismiss some of the most entertaining parts of the background (and potential mniniatures) as footnotes, it was decided that they should be given books of their own, to delve into their histories and personalities and armies with separate volumes (and, of course, cool new miniatures). I don’t work in the Studio anymore, so I can’t say whether that is still the strategy, or how plans for this are continuing. I can say that a the time we were working on Codex: CSM there was a lot of enthusiasm for the possiblities this approach allowed – new god-specific troop types and war engines, in-depth background of the various Legions and what they’ve been up to, renegade Chapters and warbands that had dedicated themselves to one god. Bear in mind that a lot of the variant armies people associate with the old Codex were not in fact from the Codex, but from the Index Astartes articles, which themselves made up two extra volumes (if one dismisses all of that Loyalist stuff!). As a lot of those tweaks and variants weren’t in Codex: CSM, the possiblity of extra Codexes addresses that issue in a way that would be far more satsifying than a few pages in a White Dwarf. I hope that it is still the intent of GW to go down this route at some stage, I think there’s immense scope for some exciting and unique armies out there.
Which kind of brings us to Daemons. There’s a simple argument for why Daemons were given their own Codex. In the huge sweep of galactic history, there are countless occasions when Space Marines and Imperial Guard have fought on the same battlefield. However, why isn’t GW inundated with complaints that you can’t take Imperial Guard in a Space Marines army? The same is true of cultists and the Lost and the Damned list – there are all sorts of other Imperial troops like the Arbites, Sisters of Battle, Planetary Defence forces, Assassins, navy crews, Adeptus Mechanicus and many others. Yet I never received a complaint that these could not be used in a Space Marines army… The book was briefed as Codex: Chaos Space Marines, and therefore deals with Chaos Space Marines. The outlook on this seems to come from a purely traditional approach – that there was a Daemons list and a cultists list in the 2nd edition 40K Codex: Chaos. Even then, they were separate lists! They were only folded into the Chaos Space Marines in the previous versionof the Codex.
I’m a very flexible gamer, I have no problem with people trying out stuff for the hell of it. If you want to take a force of Chaos Space Marines and have a few Daemons joining the fun, I’d be happy to play you. By the same token, I’d happily play against your Space Marines and Sisters of Battle allies, or your ‘Traitor Guard’ army with a few squads of Black Legion. Got a Basilisk in Iron Warriors’ colours? Bring it on! This goes back to my second point – using your imagination and doing what you want with your toy soldiers is your choice, not the games developer’s. I’d like to see more in WD and on the GW website reminding players that they are perfectly entitled to do this sort of thing.
Somebody is bound to bring up the subject of tournaments at this stage. Tournaments are an artificial environment, laying down restrictions and criteria to provide a competitive environment. I’ll reiterate my point that with both GW-organised and independent tournaments, by far the most army list mistakes (often costing the payer concerned valuable tournament points) occured with the old Codex far more than any other book around at the same time – including Witch Hunters, Craftworld Eldar and other complex multi-volume armies.
Random selection of cool Chaos stuff I’ve just found with a Google image search:
http://www.fightingtigersofveda.com/fsym.html
http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Ian%27s_Slaaneshi_Chaos_Marines
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?t=1279
http://www.area52.com.au/galleries/ttg/army_focus/matt_clifford_death_guard.htm
http://media.photobucket.com/image/chaos%20space%20marines%20%20%252522counts%20as%252522/Xardian1/Chaos%20Marines/Raptorswithchamp-unpainted.jpg
(Oh dear! He’s got that awesome axe, but there aren’t any rules for it… What are we to do?)
http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=150542
Word Bearers – with Cultists! I think the cultists-as-summoned daemons is one of the best ‘Counts As’ intepretations around.
If Daemons didn’t have their own Codex, you wouldn’t be able to have battles likes this one:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/229220.page
If I have a regret about Codex: Chaos Space Marines, it would be not having the space and resources to showcase more of this kind of stuff – in the book and White Dwarf. The creativity of players doesn’t need justification by rules – it’s treating (and showing!) 40K as the broad hobby it is, not just a game with a set of rules.
I’ll finish by saying that I’m not writing this with the illusion that the current Codex: Chaos Space Marines is perfect. It does the job it was intended to do, in the context of the brief that was given at the time and the ongoing strategy that was being considered. I’m not writing this to say that some people are wrong in their opinion, it’s just a matter of two very different approaches to addressing the same issue – the sheer Chaosness of Chaos armies! The former Codex was a very rules-driven attempt to encapsulate the wildness of Chaos, the current Codex is about a very simple foundation that allows players to make hobby-based, aesthetic decisions regarding their army without worrying about the gaming implications.
Some people prefer the first approach, some the second. That’s the way the world is, and long may it continue that way.
http://mechanicalhamster.wordpress.com/2009/09/10/differences-of-opinion/
Differences of Opinion
I’d like to take a digression to address some of the comments raised in the Signing News post, regarding decisions that were made on Codex: Chaos Space Marines. For those Hamsterites not familiar with the way the main Games Workshop games are structured, they consist of a core rulebook that that contains the rules for the game and a series of supplements that detail each of the individual armies that people can collect and game with (called Army Books for Warhammer, and Codexes for Warhammer 40,000).
To start with, let’s make one thing clear. Reasoned criticism of a work is one thing, attacks on the creator of that work are another. I’m fine with the first, I am not fine with the second, in any arena. The internet does not entitle somebody to conduct themselves without the usual consideration and manners I hope they would employ in other forms of communication. It is also too easy for some folks to forget that quite often they are expressing their opinion, not objective fact. It is entirely possible that other people have a different opinion, and it is usually of little use arguing opinions rather than explaining how those opinions were formed. I firmly believe that an informed opinion is far better than an uninformed one, even if that opinion differs from mine. I have had many players contact me or talk to me expressing their approval of the revised Codex: Chaos Space Marines and their preference for the approach that was taken. For example: http://bootae.ibforums.com/index.php?showtopic=10574
To that end, here’s some of the thinking behind the changes that were made. They were not done on a whim and the decisions were taken with some thought and consideration.
An army (and a Codex) are more than just a set of rules. In the scheme of things, rules come and go; they are an abstract mechanical representation of something else. The exact rules representation may change from edition to edition, but hopefully they fundamentally represent the same thing. The previous edition of the Codex was over-the-top on rules, trying to legislate for every eventuality on the tabletop and trying to represent in detail every aspect of a player’s miniature army.
This approach has two main problems. Firstly, it creates a mindset of false legitimacy. This isn’t just in gaming, it’s in wider society as well. Some people feel entitled to place all responsiblity on the rules-makers (or lawmakers…) with the argument, ‘Well, the rules say I can do it.’ This fundamentally diverts the choices a person makes onto somebody else, absolving them of blame (in their mind). By moving away from a set of rules that tries to legislate for every single possibility, and instead return to the original idea that these books are as much a guide to players as they are rulebooks, we sought to bring back both the responsiblity and the power for players to make the decisions for themselves. They are a framework for players to collect an army of miniature soldiers not a dictat on the way they must do so.
The second problem with this approach is at the opposite end of the scale. By having a minutiae of rules covering very detailed elements of a players army, it can also trigger the response, ‘I can’t do this because the rules don’t say I can’. By listing very specific allowances and restrictions, the old Codex essentially presented very narrow interpretations of the background, again removing the choice from the players. This is particularly the case with the Legions and Power-specific lists. While they did introduce some cool new options (which I’ll get back to later) the majority of those sub-lists were about restriction, not choice. It presented a very defined view of what was and was not possible in the vast galaxy of the 41st millenium. Some troop types never, ever appeared on the battlefield together according to the previous iteration of the rules. Some Legions never, ever used certain types of wargear. These restrictions removed lots of ‘What if…?’ situations, cementing a very rigid and literal interpretation of the background within the mechanics of collecting an army. They were unrepresentative of the anarchic and fluctuating nature of Chaos forces.
It is also important to consider the Codex in the context in which it was created – a broad platform for a typical Chaos Space Marines army. In both Warhammer and 40K, Chaos has always had an immensely diverse background, with many, many different troop types, war engines, characters and so forth. The decision was taken, as it was in Warhammer, that such diversity couldn’t be given a proper treatment in just a single volume. Rather than dismiss some of the most entertaining parts of the background (and potential mniniatures) as footnotes, it was decided that they should be given books of their own, to delve into their histories and personalities and armies with separate volumes (and, of course, cool new miniatures). I don’t work in the Studio anymore, so I can’t say whether that is still the strategy, or how plans for this are continuing. I can say that a the time we were working on Codex: CSM there was a lot of enthusiasm for the possiblities this approach allowed – new god-specific troop types and war engines, in-depth background of the various Legions and what they’ve been up to, renegade Chapters and warbands that had dedicated themselves to one god. Bear in mind that a lot of the variant armies people associate with the old Codex were not in fact from the Codex, but from the Index Astartes articles, which themselves made up two extra volumes (if one dismisses all of that Loyalist stuff!). As a lot of those tweaks and variants weren’t in Codex: CSM, the possiblity of extra Codexes addresses that issue in a way that would be far more satsifying than a few pages in a White Dwarf. I hope that it is still the intent of GW to go down this route at some stage, I think there’s immense scope for some exciting and unique armies out there.
Which kind of brings us to Daemons. There’s a simple argument for why Daemons were given their own Codex. In the huge sweep of galactic history, there are countless occasions when Space Marines and Imperial Guard have fought on the same battlefield. However, why isn’t GW inundated with complaints that you can’t take Imperial Guard in a Space Marines army? The same is true of cultists and the Lost and the Damned list – there are all sorts of other Imperial troops like the Arbites, Sisters of Battle, Planetary Defence forces, Assassins, navy crews, Adeptus Mechanicus and many others. Yet I never received a complaint that these could not be used in a Space Marines army… The book was briefed as Codex: Chaos Space Marines, and therefore deals with Chaos Space Marines. The outlook on this seems to come from a purely traditional approach – that there was a Daemons list and a cultists list in the 2nd edition 40K Codex: Chaos. Even then, they were separate lists! They were only folded into the Chaos Space Marines in the previous versionof the Codex.
I’m a very flexible gamer, I have no problem with people trying out stuff for the hell of it. If you want to take a force of Chaos Space Marines and have a few Daemons joining the fun, I’d be happy to play you. By the same token, I’d happily play against your Space Marines and Sisters of Battle allies, or your ‘Traitor Guard’ army with a few squads of Black Legion. Got a Basilisk in Iron Warriors’ colours? Bring it on! This goes back to my second point – using your imagination and doing what you want with your toy soldiers is your choice, not the games developer’s. I’d like to see more in WD and on the GW website reminding players that they are perfectly entitled to do this sort of thing.
Somebody is bound to bring up the subject of tournaments at this stage. Tournaments are an artificial environment, laying down restrictions and criteria to provide a competitive environment. I’ll reiterate my point that with both GW-organised and independent tournaments, by far the most army list mistakes (often costing the payer concerned valuable tournament points) occured with the old Codex far more than any other book around at the same time – including Witch Hunters, Craftworld Eldar and other complex multi-volume armies.
Random selection of cool Chaos stuff I’ve just found with a Google image search:
http://www.fightingtigersofveda.com/fsym.html
http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Ian%27s_Slaaneshi_Chaos_Marines
http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?t=1279
http://www.area52.com.au/galleries/ttg/army_focus/matt_clifford_death_guard.htm
http://media.photobucket.com/image/chaos%20space%20marines%20%20%252522counts%20as%252522/Xardian1/Chaos%20Marines/Raptorswithchamp-unpainted.jpg
(Oh dear! He’s got that awesome axe, but there aren’t any rules for it… What are we to do?)
http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=150542
Word Bearers – with Cultists! I think the cultists-as-summoned daemons is one of the best ‘Counts As’ intepretations around.
If Daemons didn’t have their own Codex, you wouldn’t be able to have battles likes this one:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/229220.page
If I have a regret about Codex: Chaos Space Marines, it would be not having the space and resources to showcase more of this kind of stuff – in the book and White Dwarf. The creativity of players doesn’t need justification by rules – it’s treating (and showing!) 40K as the broad hobby it is, not just a game with a set of rules.
I’ll finish by saying that I’m not writing this with the illusion that the current Codex: Chaos Space Marines is perfect. It does the job it was intended to do, in the context of the brief that was given at the time and the ongoing strategy that was being considered. I’m not writing this to say that some people are wrong in their opinion, it’s just a matter of two very different approaches to addressing the same issue – the sheer Chaosness of Chaos armies! The former Codex was a very rules-driven attempt to encapsulate the wildness of Chaos, the current Codex is about a very simple foundation that allows players to make hobby-based, aesthetic decisions regarding their army without worrying about the gaming implications.
Some people prefer the first approach, some the second. That’s the way the world is, and long may it continue that way.
Last edited by Stormlord on Sun Sep 13, 2009 9:47 pm; edited 1 time in total
Stormlord- Posts: 3484
Join date: 2009-06-16
Age: 34
Location: Jackson
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by Stormlord on Sun Sep 13, 2009 9:46 pm
LOL
and here is Stelek's Rebuttal to this article
http://www.yesthetruthhurts.com/2009/09/non-news-makes-news.html
Non-news Makes the News
By Stelek
4 votes
Shit Codex, making the news!
Hey who remembers the old Eldar Codex, the old Ulthwe list?
Oh yeah, I remember.
See, it's all about the consistent failures.
Shall we talk about the success? Dark Elves, yay got one right!
VC are utter crap, and the idiocy that will entail from me saying that will be both sad and humorous.
Takes 5 Codices and 10 years to figure out what we, the consumer, want?
Please, don't stop by Gav.
You aren't beloved, you are hated with a passion I normally see reserved for blood enemies.
Don't try and act like it's anything but an attempt to rewrite history.
The CSM rewrite was done in an attempt to bring FOW / AT-43 style 'simple' army lists to a game that is based on the customization of said lists.
It was a massive, epic fail.
Shame on you Bols, for posting that crap without regard to the history of the game or the man behind it.
Fuckin' A.
If the studio isn't to blame, we the customers are?
We know damn well we want more choice--the lack of choice of army in the old army book was easy to fix:
Delete all references to 'khorne hates slaanesh, tzeentch hates nurgle'--or whatever retconning you did, so khorne doesn't hate tzeentch, and slaanesh + nurgle are no longer enemies. What, you think we forgot that stupidity?
Oh right, deleting all that equals fixed Codex.
Has all the customization, only now there are MORE choices.
Let me see--with the wonderful fuckup you did to C: CSM...
Chaos Lords got:
One Mark.
Bolter weapons.
1 type of power weapon.
Jump pack/bike.
Horse.
Meltabombs.
Or terminator armor, and the above options with no horsies, jump pack/bike, or meltabombs.
From:
Mark.
Power weapon.
Bolter weapons.
Master-crafted/Spike Bits.
Servo-Arm.
6 Veteran Skills.
Average of 9 'gifts' per 'god'.
Non-generic demon weapons (that don't suck and fuck you up).
15 Daemonic Gifts.
Note I removed Gifts and Vet skills IC's or CSM characters already get.
Not to mention the Lord could be a Sorc, which was much better than the current crapfest librarian without a hood lolz we have now.
Choice?
You took all our choices away, and blame us for it?
YOU did that.
Mutated Hull? Real Demons? We remember when Chaos was powerful, and fun.
Seriously, you have one huge set of balls.
FUCK YOURSELF.
and here is Stelek's Rebuttal to this article
http://www.yesthetruthhurts.com/2009/09/non-news-makes-news.html
Non-news Makes the News
By Stelek
4 votes
Shit Codex, making the news!
Hey who remembers the old Eldar Codex, the old Ulthwe list?
Oh yeah, I remember.
See, it's all about the consistent failures.
Shall we talk about the success? Dark Elves, yay got one right!
VC are utter crap, and the idiocy that will entail from me saying that will be both sad and humorous.
Takes 5 Codices and 10 years to figure out what we, the consumer, want?
Please, don't stop by Gav.
You aren't beloved, you are hated with a passion I normally see reserved for blood enemies.
Don't try and act like it's anything but an attempt to rewrite history.
The CSM rewrite was done in an attempt to bring FOW / AT-43 style 'simple' army lists to a game that is based on the customization of said lists.
It was a massive, epic fail.
Shame on you Bols, for posting that crap without regard to the history of the game or the man behind it.
Fuckin' A.
If the studio isn't to blame, we the customers are?
We know damn well we want more choice--the lack of choice of army in the old army book was easy to fix:
Delete all references to 'khorne hates slaanesh, tzeentch hates nurgle'--or whatever retconning you did, so khorne doesn't hate tzeentch, and slaanesh + nurgle are no longer enemies. What, you think we forgot that stupidity?
Oh right, deleting all that equals fixed Codex.
Has all the customization, only now there are MORE choices.
Let me see--with the wonderful fuckup you did to C: CSM...
Chaos Lords got:
One Mark.
Bolter weapons.
1 type of power weapon.
Jump pack/bike.
Horse.
Meltabombs.
Or terminator armor, and the above options with no horsies, jump pack/bike, or meltabombs.
From:
Mark.
Power weapon.
Bolter weapons.
Master-crafted/Spike Bits.
Servo-Arm.
6 Veteran Skills.
Average of 9 'gifts' per 'god'.
Non-generic demon weapons (that don't suck and fuck you up).
15 Daemonic Gifts.
Note I removed Gifts and Vet skills IC's or CSM characters already get.
Not to mention the Lord could be a Sorc, which was much better than the current crapfest librarian without a hood lolz we have now.
Choice?
You took all our choices away, and blame us for it?
YOU did that.
Mutated Hull? Real Demons? We remember when Chaos was powerful, and fun.
Seriously, you have one huge set of balls.
FUCK YOURSELF.
Stormlord- Posts: 3484
Join date: 2009-06-16
Age: 34
Location: Jackson
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by Smackaelf on Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:03 am
I still stand on my belief that Gavin Thorpe{Destroyer of Chaos} is sent in to kill off a army with his HORRIBLE writing and force players to play other armies. Other than Micah there are NO one that plays chaos as their main army.........Russ Got so tired of it he went GooD???? Shawn went sadistic??? Cain is on and off the fence?
Mike sold his Nurgle or was trying to sell it? I have enough Chaos to make 3 1850 list and i would rather wait till they get a REAL writer to do the Legions book to Ever touch my Chaos again..............Nuff Said
Mike sold his Nurgle or was trying to sell it? I have enough Chaos to make 3 1850 list and i would rather wait till they get a REAL writer to do the Legions book to Ever touch my Chaos again..............Nuff Said
Smackaelf- Posts: 780
Join date: 2009-06-15
Age: 39
Location: Columbia -
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by Salamander25 on Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:17 am
I've stated time and again that imo Pete Haine's codex turned Chaos Marines into what I felt was a power-gamer's army. There were too many easy "lol you die" combos that could be put together with that old codex. I'm glad they got rid of it and moved back to a more generic chaos list. I harbor no ill will towards Gav for the current iteration of Chaos. If anything, I blame Pete for bringing in a bunch of whiny players who expect their armies to always be overpowered and easy-sauce.
I miss the specialized demons and greater demons and armies as much as the next person, but I felt Pet's codex was over-the-top and needed to be brought down to earth. It didn't matter who wrote the current Chaos Codex, everyone was going to hate that person anyway. All the people dumping their Chaos armies now are the people who are mad cause their armies aren't OP anymore.
I miss the specialized demons and greater demons and armies as much as the next person, but I felt Pet's codex was over-the-top and needed to be brought down to earth. It didn't matter who wrote the current Chaos Codex, everyone was going to hate that person anyway. All the people dumping their Chaos armies now are the people who are mad cause their armies aren't OP anymore.
Salamander25- Posts: 317
Join date: 2009-06-15
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by legion on Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:23 am
OP?!!!! just fyi i started in 4th and used the old codex and i got my teeth kicked in more than once, yet i was fine with it, because i could build the list the way i wanted, to be honest i didnt win any games till the new codex and 5th edition of course i know that has alot to do with me getting more use to the system and understanding other armies, but i totally disagree with the OP statement, thing is MORE people played chaos cause the codex was more flexiable and it was fun to build a list,and since more people played that made chaos win more so i belive thats where the overpowered thing may come from, compared to the new codex all you can do take what they give. one thing i read that gives me hope to bring chaos back is the making of other codexs for more custom builds.
legion- Posts: 138
Join date: 2009-06-16
Age: 32
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by Salamander25 on Mon Sep 14, 2009 12:21 pm
I'm guessing you didn't play against many slaanesh/khorne armies with the whole "Demon spam" crap. Especially Slaanesh. Little 100 point units that rip through entire armies in a couple turns.
I literally stopped playing my Chaos army in 4th because winning was getting too easy. 90% of the games I played were over in about 3 turns, and almost always a complete table.
Some people loved it and a lot of chaos armies were formed during that time... but I just ended up dropping my army after a few months of it.
I literally stopped playing my Chaos army in 4th because winning was getting too easy. 90% of the games I played were over in about 3 turns, and almost always a complete table.
Some people loved it and a lot of chaos armies were formed during that time... but I just ended up dropping my army after a few months of it.
Salamander25- Posts: 317
Join date: 2009-06-15
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by fallenbob on Mon Sep 14, 2009 2:16 pm
maybe they'll redo the chaos dex and make it similar to the ole chaos dex, not sure how they'd do it but its possible
now as far as the demon spam armies, if i remember correctly those relied on using little units as a delivery mechanism, ie, groups of bikers. if its what i'm thinking of then that list was too much of a one trick pony and easily killed once people learned how to deal with it.
now as far as the demon spam armies, if i remember correctly those relied on using little units as a delivery mechanism, ie, groups of bikers. if its what i'm thinking of then that list was too much of a one trick pony and easily killed once people learned how to deal with it.
fallenbob- Xerox - aka Paper Jam
- Posts: 2352
Join date: 2009-06-15
Age: 27
Location: hattiesburg
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by Salamander25 on Mon Sep 14, 2009 2:32 pm
That is basically it, although as a delivery system, multiple small squads in rhinos tended to be much more resilient and reliable than bikes, in my experience. Backed up by heavy support, I rarely saw people "easily kill" the army, although I agree that if you were well-prepared in advance, you could find ways to counter it (although not with every army).
Now days, with armies in play like the Space Marine "Thunder Stomp" army, and the difficulty of cutting through mech armies.... well, it's a completely different game today, and I doubt the old 4th ed codex would fair as well in today's gaming climate. When it first came out though.... there wasn't much out there that could stand up to a good solidly-built Chaos force without resorting to power-gaming.
I remeber one friend's army in particular. Slaanesh. In two years of knowing him and playing games along side him, I never saw him lose a game, and his Slaanesh lord in particular - I never saw the character die in close combat, no matter how badly outnumbered or who it went up against. It had something insane like 7 close combat attacks at strength 7, and initiative 7... I don't even remember anymore, but I saw that single character rake through entire armies by itself... There was some stupid sorcery power that prevented you from targeting him in the shooting phase.
Now days, with armies in play like the Space Marine "Thunder Stomp" army, and the difficulty of cutting through mech armies.... well, it's a completely different game today, and I doubt the old 4th ed codex would fair as well in today's gaming climate. When it first came out though.... there wasn't much out there that could stand up to a good solidly-built Chaos force without resorting to power-gaming.
I remeber one friend's army in particular. Slaanesh. In two years of knowing him and playing games along side him, I never saw him lose a game, and his Slaanesh lord in particular - I never saw the character die in close combat, no matter how badly outnumbered or who it went up against. It had something insane like 7 close combat attacks at strength 7, and initiative 7... I don't even remember anymore, but I saw that single character rake through entire armies by itself... There was some stupid sorcery power that prevented you from targeting him in the shooting phase.
Salamander25- Posts: 317
Join date: 2009-06-15
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by fallenbob on Mon Sep 14, 2009 3:13 pm
o.O power that prevented you from shooting him... don't remember it... not saying that it didn't exist either just that its been so long...
that aside any list that is built for that type of play will only get resistance from lists designed for that lvl of play, for casual armies, i'm not surprised that they got stomped flat. its the same for any casual army vs army designed to go all out.
i remember don and russ with their lists with the old chaos dex and they're lists weren't OP
now if you think that was bad, you should have seen the tri falcon, lots of harilies army, people whined so much about that army
that aside any list that is built for that type of play will only get resistance from lists designed for that lvl of play, for casual armies, i'm not surprised that they got stomped flat. its the same for any casual army vs army designed to go all out.
i remember don and russ with their lists with the old chaos dex and they're lists weren't OP
now if you think that was bad, you should have seen the tri falcon, lots of harilies army, people whined so much about that army
Last edited by fallenbob on Mon Sep 14, 2009 3:15 pm; edited 1 time in total
fallenbob- Xerox - aka Paper Jam
- Posts: 2352
Join date: 2009-06-15
Age: 27
Location: hattiesburg
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by Smackaelf on Mon Sep 14, 2009 3:15 pm
Salamander25 wrote:I've stated time and again that imo Pete Haine's codex turned Chaos Marines into what I felt was a power-gamer's army. There were too many easy "lol you die" combos that could be put together with that old codex. I'm glad they got rid of it and moved back to a more generic chaos list. I harbor no ill will towards Gav for the current iteration of Chaos. If anything, I blame Pete for bringing in a bunch of whiny players who expect their armies to always be overpowered and easy-sauce.
I miss the specialized demons and greater demons and armies as much as the next person, but I felt Pet's codex was over-the-top and needed to be brought down to earth. It didn't matter who wrote the current Chaos Codex, everyone was going to hate that person anyway. All the people dumping their Chaos armies now are the people who are mad cause their armies aren't OP anymore.
I honestly agree with you on the Pete Codex it was overpowered if you went Iron Warriors which was a head of its time i think HMMMMMMM a mech army destroying you with mass firepower. Imo the demon army was easy to beat kill the messengers it always worked for me . I used to play chaos but ole Gavin ruined that like every CODEX he has every written (40k wise). My next ? is have you tried to build a chaos list with that dex? It is very boring chaos SUCKS now because they are not a threat they are a very weak army due to all the watering down . Who is scared of a demon prince ??noone you shoot him down.
Who is scared of a lord ??? No one they are the worst HQ choice in the book. Who even cares about possessed ....random does not work in 40k and its not very chaos........ if it has no threat . Who has they worst termies (overpriced non marked..... waste of plastic)in all the Galaxy if you said chaos your Right! Who has the worst dreadnoughts if you said chaos your Right again!!! HMMM lets go over what is good 1 hq the lash Man (which will gain you friends the world over )chosen the only elite worth taking, Plague marines , Zerkers, Noise marines and oblits (which will gain you friends the world over )hmmmmm sounds like one list that most everyone that plays it whines about.
Ill pick up chaos if they EVER bring the legion books back or replace the pile of crap know as Gavin CSM /Space Pirates
Final note Chaos is boring and that shouldn't be...................... Chaos
Smackaelf- Posts: 780
Join date: 2009-06-15
Age: 39
Location: Columbia -
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by Smackaelf on Mon Sep 14, 2009 3:23 pm
Salamander25 wrote:If anything, I blame Pete for bringing in a bunch of whiny players who expect their armies to always be overpowered and easy-sauce.
Easy to say when your army is a tier 1 ARMY (COUGH ) Vulkan List (COUGH)
im not whiny just bored...........
Smackaelf- Posts: 780
Join date: 2009-06-15
Age: 39
Location: Columbia -
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by Stormlord on Mon Sep 14, 2009 3:35 pm
There is no way your going to convince me that the Pete Haines 3.5 chaos codex wasnt the 2nd most powerful codex in its day (only outdone by certain eldar builds as Sean stated above).
I saw more Iron Warriors and Emperor's Children's armies during those years than you would think (even remember a "fallen angels" army using iron warrior rules at one of greg's tournaments hehe).
Oh also, there was a chaos minor psychic power that you could get that made it so your prince/lord couldnt be shot at, granted you had to roll it, but you could spend 10 points per roll on the minor psychic table, and if you spent the 60 points, you were gaurunteed to get them all. I would have to look it up, but i remember it.
Now, i know Don and Russ and myself have gone into this over and over again, and we are going to have to agree to disagree, but in my opinion, chaos is not weak in 5th. Its certainly not as strong as it was in the last codex, but its not weak. What it is, is boring. As Donnie says, this codex sucked out all of the fluff "soul" from chaos and so now the only difference between black legion and iron warriors is a paint scheme.
I also believe that alot of resentment from chaos players is because they gimped certain armies (daemon packs for word bearers, cultists for alpha legion, blast master/sonic blaster predators/dreadnaughts etc etc for emperor's children). Alot of people spent ALOT of money modifying their armies certain ways that the new codex doesnt allow for. In all honesty, if i built an army like that I would be pissed at Thorpe too.....
I saw more Iron Warriors and Emperor's Children's armies during those years than you would think (even remember a "fallen angels" army using iron warrior rules at one of greg's tournaments hehe).
Oh also, there was a chaos minor psychic power that you could get that made it so your prince/lord couldnt be shot at, granted you had to roll it, but you could spend 10 points per roll on the minor psychic table, and if you spent the 60 points, you were gaurunteed to get them all. I would have to look it up, but i remember it.
Now, i know Don and Russ and myself have gone into this over and over again, and we are going to have to agree to disagree, but in my opinion, chaos is not weak in 5th. Its certainly not as strong as it was in the last codex, but its not weak. What it is, is boring. As Donnie says, this codex sucked out all of the fluff "soul" from chaos and so now the only difference between black legion and iron warriors is a paint scheme.
I also believe that alot of resentment from chaos players is because they gimped certain armies (daemon packs for word bearers, cultists for alpha legion, blast master/sonic blaster predators/dreadnaughts etc etc for emperor's children). Alot of people spent ALOT of money modifying their armies certain ways that the new codex doesnt allow for. In all honesty, if i built an army like that I would be pissed at Thorpe too.....
Stormlord- Posts: 3484
Join date: 2009-06-16
Age: 34
Location: Jackson
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by Smackaelf on Mon Sep 14, 2009 3:43 pm
Yeaah First my Alpha Legion died , then my EC. SO i am validated at being pissed off BOTH had to be repainted . Yes chaos is weak in 5th lash doesnt work on Mech.
Smackaelf- Posts: 780
Join date: 2009-06-15
Age: 39
Location: Columbia -
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by fallenbob on Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:00 pm
Stormlord wrote:
(even remember a "fallen angels" army using iron warrior rules at one of greg's tournaments hehe).
hehe
fallenbob- Xerox - aka Paper Jam
- Posts: 2352
Join date: 2009-06-15
Age: 27
Location: hattiesburg
Re: Gav Thorpe Defends Newest Chaos Codex/Stelek Responds ....
by Salamander25 on Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:38 pm
Stormlord wrote:Oh also, there was a chaos minor psychic power that you could get that made it so your prince/lord couldnt be shot at, granted you had to roll it, but you could spend 10 points per roll on the minor psychic table, and if you spent the 60 points, you were gaurunteed to get them all. I would have to look it up, but i remember it.
This. ^
It was called something like: "Glamour" or "Illusion" or something. Basically when the spell went off, enemy units either could not see you or they would perceive you as a friendly unit (or pick your fluff reason of choice) in their shooting phase, rendering you essentially completely immune to shooting. Around 60 points would guarantee you got it. About the only defense for it were anti-psycher wargear items. Additionally you could try your luck landing some ordinance near him and hope it scattered onto him, although you had to aim at something other than him. Good times, let me tell you.
Salamander25- Posts: 317
Join date: 2009-06-15
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Page 1 of 2
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum