PDA

View Full Version : Codices for GW



Nyarathlotep
21-05-2008, 02:19
Amidst the fallout of the new CSM codex, and most likely the new SM 'dex, what exactly is GW's issue with getting quality products out. I understand the bottom line, but when thousands of players are shouting that they want Iron warriors rules etc. why can't they keep up? If time is an issue, hire more people to do more rules testing, and writing. If money is the issue, I think we would have what we have now. Are the new codices just the wave of the future with less non-vanilla armies? Does GW plan to release Codex: Iron Warriors, or a conglomeration of Chaos legions? Just a few thoughts for the evening!

TheDarkDuke
21-05-2008, 02:37
Wait CSM and the upcoming SM codex are not quality products? As far as I have heard on here and outside of this wonderful world of Warseer, there are few who think CSM is a poor product, and nearly everyone seems pleased and excited about the rumors of SM.

Cult CSM armies are the only ones a little peeved... and really only Emperor's Children and Word Bearers... the only whining from Iron Warriors has been that they are no longer horribly abusive power gaming lists. With all cult troops becoming core there is still big time cult influence. Thousand Sons and Death Guard are actually better IMO now then before, add in the Icon Marks, and really other then the two cult I mentioned earlier you can not only field the cults, but do them better and far more balanced if you ask me. However some people will never be happy, its just human nature to complain... its how most of us get through everyday life.

==Me==
21-05-2008, 03:13
I'm gonna agree with TheDarkDuke, the CSM Codex is solid and addresses the vast majority of Chaos armies from pure old Legion to naughty Space Marines. Warbands is how the Codex is set up, which is how most CSM groups operate nowadays and Legion lists are possible with proper theming and a little counts-as. What got axed? Daemonbomb (abusive), Iron Warriors Pastry Chefs (abusive), Siren (abusive).

The upcoming SM Codex is looking very cool, from the BoLS rumors. The only thing you miss out on are traits (abusive) and las/plas (abusive).

I'm seeing a trend here.

And while we're at it, what about Dark Angels, Eldar, and Orks? 3 very well done Codeces and overall well received by their player bases and the community.

In b4 Chaos Codex flamewar.

Nyarathlotep
21-05-2008, 03:50
I hadn't thought of it that way. Cool. I don't play CSM and have only glanced at the codex. I will look again. I do like the idea of the warband theme. After all, they are still marines! LOL!

Althanan
21-05-2008, 04:53
Amidst the fallout of the new CSM codex, and most likely the new SM 'dex

Wait... the new Marine 'dex isn't out till October and it's "most likely" a failure?

Someone phone GW, and let them know not to waste their time...

Brimstone
21-05-2008, 04:59
The upcoming SM Codex is looking very cool, from the BoLS rumors. The only thing you miss out on are traits (abusive) and las/plas (abusive).

You mean the rumours from Bolter & Chainsword repeated both on BoLS and here on Warseer.

==Me==
21-05-2008, 11:33
You mean the rumours from Bolter & Chainsword repeated both on BoLS and here on Warseer.

That's the one:p

St.Germaine
21-05-2008, 17:08
While I agree that the new Chaos codex is a decent list, it has more than it's share of problems. I'm not going to get into a laundry list as that's been done to death in other places but my two biggest beefs with it are the generic daemons (which are flat-ass useless) and the elimination of cult armies (yeah right, GW'll do a Cult Codex in a couple years - I'll believe it when I see it).

GW has lately shown a tendency to throw out the baby with the bath water instead of fixing problems. This makes me very nervous about what they'll do to the SM codex (and IG some time after that). The traits system had issues, there is little doubt about that but this is due more to 1) GW's failure to properly balance disadvantages with advantages, and 2) GW's failure to recognize that there are low-lifes out there that won't use the system as it was designed (as a fluff enhancer) and merely as a tool to extract the maximum advantage from a list (balanced or not). Even recognizing the latter issue, the first is the more critical and I suspect will not be addressed. GW has been accused for some time of dumbing down the game to make it easier for the younger players to jump in. Whether they are or not conducting this shift as a marketing choice isn't the point I'm making. That the effect is taking place is clear.

For some reason GW apparently believes that choice = unacceptable complexity. I'm guessing that their target audience is perceived as mentally challenged as we can't be trusted to be able to make choices with our lists. Of all the codices the Chaos was in need of a small degree of simplification but their action was more on the level of a full frontal lobotomy instead of the excision of a small benign tumor. What bugs me the most about this is that while the GW bean counters have clearly been in complete control for a very long time, they seem to have missed the obvious on this one. Options make players happy. Happy players buy "stuff". If a player has an idea for an army and can do it under the rules, he'll buy the goodies needed for that army. (Sad as it is price doesn't seem to be a factor. While we justifiably complain about the prices, we still continue to buy if it is needed for our current army.) The more options a person has, the more likely he is to buy material for that army. Look at DE and Necrons. For a long time they had very little in the way of options and sales/interest have suffered. Necrons got a boost in options and sales increased. DE are alleged getting there boost in the very near future. While the overall public is generally a herd of sheep, gamers are a bit separated from the pack. We don't like to be pigeon-holed and if we have to be pigeon-holed, one had better provide lots of holes. Unfortunately GW seems to be filling holes as opposed to making them which is counterproductive from a marketing standpoint.

I commented earlier on the failure by GW to properly balance the traits system. Rumors are that traits are going away. This infuriates me as it can be balanced as should have been done in the first place. Over at B&C we spent a great deal of time doing the work for them. The original idea was to fix the system, submit it to them, and let GW use whatever of it they wished. The point we were making was that this is a job that can be done. The unspoken message was why didn't you do it in the first place. I was worried all along that we were taking too much time and I suspect that we were too late by the time we finished it. My suspicions at this time are that traits will be gone when the redux arrives. My hope is that the dumbed down (again) SM codex will have squad options that allow the application of some of the traits if not all. From a marketing POV this makes sense as allowing some of the traits options as squad upgrades will spur sales for items that lead to non-traditional Orders of Battle. While a limited number of pigeon-holes may be acceptable to new players, those of us who have been around for a while cherish the ability to do something different instead of the the same old thing again.