PDA

View Full Version : Chaos Marines Good for a New Starter?



Jedi152
19-01-2009, 14:00
Well yet again i have decided to test the waters of 40k, and my mind turns to armies.

I had originally planned to do a small Marine force for the small size, nice models and a pretty much full plastic range, but my eye has been drawn to Chaos Marines, mainly by some lovely models, and the fact that Chaos are cool.

Having never played 40k before, what are they like? Do they have a nice gentle learning curve? Are they nice and forgiving?

A few more basic questions: Do God-specific chapters have special rules? Can CSM's use daemons?

Thanks in advance.

Mannimarco
19-01-2009, 14:17
csms have summoned daemons, not really worth it, theres no bonus in keeping your army limited to one god

they are a very easy army to get into and certain lists are very forgiving (mainly death guard type armies)

Chaos also brings us the lash/obliterator spam but never use this or you wont get to play anybody

Mercer
19-01-2009, 14:19
CSM are like marines but with a extra attack as they carry bolt pistols and ccw. Also they have cool things like a defiler and obliterators, which are pretty good units. Along with that they have the normal imperial weaponary and vehicles etc.

If you like the good guys gone bad then give them a type.

Brucopeloso
19-01-2009, 14:25
Chaos marines are a viable force with some really good units (obliterators, daemon princes) and some of the best troop choices in the game (chaos marines, berzerkers, plague marines).

A well balanced CSM force will be able to handle most armies and is much easier to lern than say necrons or dark eldar.

God specific chapters are not described but god specific units e.g. Khorne berzerkers have special rules. You can field god specific armies with some effort but they aren't as easy to play with as the "balanced approach" army.

CSM have two summoned daemon units: the greater daemon and the lesser daemon. Neither of them is terribly effective but if you have some daemon miniatures you can fit them in the army.

Lord Damocles
19-01-2009, 14:28
Having never played 40k before, what are they like? Do they have a nice gentle learning curve? Are they nice and forgiving?
Chaos Marines have the best Troops choices in the game making them an excellent choice.
They're a bit like loyalist marines in that they're fairly forgiving compared to some other armies (Necrons, whooo!) due to their high toughness and save. They won't auto-regroup like loyalists, but the greater specialisation of their units more than makes up for that.

The list is pretty good too; with Spawn being the only unit which comes close to being worthless (at 1500pts).


A few more basic questions: Do God-specific chapters have special rules?
No.
Doesn't mean that you can't make themed legion/chapter lists though.


Can CSM's use daemons?
They get 'Lesser Deamons' and 'Greater Deamons' which are generic versions. They don't get access to the gribblies from the stand alone Deamons codex to keep the focus of the list on the Chaos Marines.

MrGiggles
19-01-2009, 14:43
Pretty much what everyone has said here. CSM's are definitely Marines, so they're a good start for anyone. They have potent troops which play well and don't die all that quickly. I also find the extra racks and iconography make CSM's a bit more of a painters army than most (but definitely not all) loyalist Marine chapters. There's definitely a wealth of detail on most CSM models.

Vandelan
19-01-2009, 14:55
Chaos Marines are one of the harder armies to play in 40k simply because of the sheer amount of goodies you can get. You can easily be tempted to play too much flash and lose your substance. Your units aren't as focused around firepower as your loyalist counterparts, but instead focusing on making the troops better.

On the subject of mono god armies and whatnot, Chaos Marines is the army to play a mono god list. Marines are meant to be well rounded as it is, and playing more than one god can suck up a lot of points. I recommend starting off playing icons of Chaos Glory as they are bar none the best icon for their points and then play a different icon here and there to just test how you like the different icons.

Daemon Princes are the only HQs worth playing aside from Lords with Daemon weapons because they can do everything a lord and sorcerer can and be way more nasty in close combat.

Skip possessed and dreadnoughts entirely. They aren't worth it.

Chaos Marines are your bread and butter, icons give them a lot of options but also their options for weapons aren't as impressive as their loyalist counterparts.

As far as the cult troops are concerned, Berzerkers are the best for their points thanks to run. Plague Marines are good, but have their drawbacks like being slower in CC and the FNP nerf. Thousand Sons are expensive and really only good against MEQ. Noise Marines are just expensive and not really worth paying the points for their sonic weaponry, Doom Siren yes, Blastmaster maybe...

Tanks are always good to have, same with obliterators.

On Daemons... The summoned Lesser Daemons are worthless, they're just too expensive to be only as good as a CSM in CC minus the equipment. Why play them when you could be playing more marines? Greater Daemons are pretty nasty, but having to sacrifice a champion is a pretty hefty cost. Stick with Champions with powerfists and Daemon Princes.


I sure hope that helps!

davidjones1
19-01-2009, 14:56
Yeah but they look cool so go for it!

AdmiralDick
19-01-2009, 18:04
i don't have a great deal to add as most of the major points have been covered by everyone else. however...


Having never played 40k before, what are they like? Do they have a nice gentle learning curve? Are they nice and forgiving?

they do indeed have a gentle learning curve, they are forgiving and don't rely on any complex tactics, so you won't often be massacred. sadly though, the latest codex is a little bit like 'chaos-lite', which makes army construction a little bit drag-and-drop. there's not much skill in constructing an army, just pick the good units (Daemon Princes with wings and Lash of Submission, Cult Troops, Obliteraters) and don't pick the bad (other HQs, Possessed, Spawn). there isn't a great deal you can do to tailor units, and generally speaking none of the options are bad (just not as good as others).

this means that there isn't a lot of room for growth in the book. you can keep buying new units, but you won't really find any new tricks.


A few more basic questions: Do God-specific chapters have special rules?

sadly, they no longer have special rules (though some people will say that's a good thing). and to be honest, as others have said, the set-up of the codex makes mono-god armies rather awkward and not very inspiring. for the effort put into them, they either don't differentiate from the middle-ground enough, or are simply not effective enough.

hopefully GW will release better rules for them in the future, either on there own or in a new Codex: CSM. in the mean time there is nothing to stop you from modelling one of the famous Legions or Chapters and use Apoc as a setting to better represent them. (though i would personally say that the C:SM represents the AL and NL better).


Can CSM's use daemons?

yes and no.

the generic lesser daemons and generic greater daemons are no less daemon than the ones from the Codex: Chaos Daemons, but they aren't as interesting (or helpful). the lessers have there time and place, but they are more of an annoyance and tar pit than the cutting edge of of your assault based army.

Vampiric16
19-01-2009, 18:17
I have watched a player with a World Eaters themed force rip through most enemies with ease. Although Legion armies are less forgiving than a generic list, i find they are more rewarding. Since i play word bearers, i always use at least one unit of lesser daemons and a greater daemon. These are brilliant when summoned by an outflanking unit of chosen. Go with what suits you as a player.

AdmiralDick
19-01-2009, 18:24
I have watched a player with a World Eaters themed force rip through most enemies with ease. Although Legion armies are less forgiving than a generic list, i find they are more rewarding.

i would agree that of all the mono-god forces Khorne and Nurgle work the best, but they a) don't actually represent the background of the the WE or DG and b) still aren't that different from an army that doesn't rely on those marks. they still use the same choice of units and tactics (with the notable exception of Lash Princes).

so in principle i agree that its worthwhile, but it an exception rather than a rule.


Since i play word bearers, i always use at least one unit of lesser daemons and a greater daemon. These are brilliant when summoned by an outflanking unit of chosen.

but then that's how everyone uses lesser daemons. whether they play WB or anyone else.

Lucky
19-01-2009, 19:48
Not meaning to hi-jack Jedi's thread but would the "Doombringer Annihilation" (15 terminators and a lord) be a workable base for an army? It would be backed up by some troops and heavy support. Thanks.

Linky: http://tinyurl.com/a499g8

Vandelan
19-01-2009, 20:10
Not meaning to hi-jack Jedi's thread but would the "Doombringer Annihilation" (15 terminators and a lord) be a workable base for an army? It would be backed up by some troops and heavy support. Thanks.

Linky: http://tinyurl.com/a499g8

The Renegade Strike Force is the best for starting a Chaos Marines army.

If you could get both, I would recommend doing it.

Playa
19-01-2009, 20:23
Hey,


I had originally planned to do a small Marine force for the small size, nice models and a pretty much full plastic range, but my eye has been drawn to Chaos

Yeah well, hold that thought . . .

If you're thinking of playing Chaos because of their former variety, think again.
All the posters stating Chaos "can" be a competitive army skirt a disturbing factoid -
There are approximately *two* viable first-tier lists in C:CSM under 5th ed.

This wasn't the result of some cunnin' scheme involving advanced math.
It was the result of developer ignorance and apathy in equal amounts.
Don't reward that heinous work ethic by buying this shoddy product.

Besides, with the perks their new dex gives SM, you'd be nuts not to use it!


Can CSM's use daemons?

Yes, but they suck. I'd trade them all in a heartbeat for Eeevil Scouts.
And so, I say unto you - play Soul Drinkers. Fluff sample, short version:
SM who got into hot water for pimp-smacking some Mechanicus thieves.

It turns out declining summary execution for it = Traitorus. Who knew?

Their fluff is that some Characters are mutating due to a Tzeentchian curse.
(Evidently, the author thought this was an important plot point.)
Most Soul Drinkers accepted their Chapter Master's mutation:

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Soul_Drinkers

Don't miss out on the piles of lovely new Units and models SM get:

Play the list as recent "traitors" that still use their Loyalist dex.
All your RnF Marines/ Termis/ Dreads can be AoBR models.
Weapon Specialists and Vets, etc can be CSM models.

So, your army won't be hamstrung by C: CSM's "streamlining" nonsense.
Good luck, and have fun. ;- )


Playa

massey
19-01-2009, 21:50
Few people are happy with the new Chaos codex. The old codex had many more options, and Chaos players loved it (while most people who played other armies hated it). The new codex did a lot of streamlining, and took out a lot of the benefits that playing a themed army gave in the last edition. So many people are unhappy with the new book.

Regardless, the Chaos army has a lot of good choices, is very forgiving, and is competitive. Just know that you missed the golden age of Chaos (i.e., the last edition of the codex).

reds8n
19-01-2009, 21:56
Chaos is an excellent choice for a 1st 40K army. Nice variety of troops and models, not least due to the high number of plastics and compatibility with other ranges.

You can indeed use demon models in the army, and whilst they might perhaps not be optimal choices, they are still worth considering as they have their uses.

And, it lets you actually sneakily build 2 armies (3 I guess if you square base them) whilst making it look like you are building 1.

Ideal if you have some mad honeymoon to pay for. :D

Jedi152
20-01-2009, 14:24
Wow, thanks for all the replies people. It seems that chaos is a solid choice, even if it has become a bit watered down in the latest version. Daemons sound like a bit of a crummy choice, especially since my favourites (horrors) are still so expensive. I might get a small unit because they look so nice, but that's it.

I guess my next step is to pick up the codex and see what rules i like. I've fallen for some of the models but i don't know if they're viable at all (jump pack lord, possessed etc.) so i can find that out.

Playa: It was hard for me to pick. Marines have some lovely models (Vanguard and Sternguard are amazing), and the new book looks lovely - but i fell for Chaos Marines just a bit more.

Reds8n: Don't remind me...

Thanks for the help everyone, i'll try to get the codex this weekend.

Brucopeloso
20-01-2009, 14:46
Hey,
There are approximately *two* viable first-tier lists in C:CSM under 5th ed.

This wasn't the result of some cunnin' scheme involving advanced math.
It was the result of developer ignorance and apathy in equal amounts.
Don't reward that heinous work ethic by buying this shoddy product.



Quoted for thruth! Current CSM is a shoddy product!
However if everybody ditched chaos and went for SM we would end up like DE and see our beloved CSM updated every ten SM codecii or more....... terrible!

In the end this codex is rubbish, lacks in flavour while not addressing cheese and game balance but is still playable and potentially competitive so if you like the models go for it!

Ubermensch Commander
20-01-2009, 17:03
Chaos Codex is a good choice for beginner. Still Marines after all.
Lots of variety.
However, on the assertion by Admiral Dick that this codex is *drag-and-drop*
I would counter with at least now it is player discretion for drag-and-drop as opposed the previous codex which IMPOSED army restrictions for the Legions, so EVERY single IW army, AL army, etc. looked damn near the same. Drag-and-drop is not new.

AdmiralDick
20-01-2009, 17:27
I would counter with at least now it is player discretion for drag-and-drop as opposed the previous codex which IMPOSED army restrictions for the Legions, so EVERY single IW army, AL army, etc. looked damn near the same. Drag-and-drop is not new.

i agree that most IW ended up looking very similar (though i'm not convinced that they were as similar as you may be trying to imply). however, i think that that actually doesn't address the issue correctly.

in the previous codex, IW may well have looked like other IW, but they didn't look like WE. where as, in the current codex, IW look like an awful lot like WE. the previous codex had some serious flaws when it came to flexibility within a Legion (personally i never ran into them, but i'm not going to deny that there are a lot of people on this forum that were aggravated by them), but it still left room for 8 lists that played very differently and had different strengths and weaknesses but used the same basic building blocks (this is in addition to armies built using the basic/BL choices. people often complain about IW armies, but they seldom complain about NL, which means they must have been different enough for people to notice.

the current codex doesn't allow for anything like that kind of flexibility. its a question of 'Lash Prince or not Lash Prince?', rather than 'NL or AL?'

i'm not saying i want to go back in time, but i think, after Codex: Eldar, we were all expecting something a little more grand. the Eldar book for the most part did manage to capture a lot of the structural features of the Craftworld lists (Saim Hann jetbikers, Iyanden wraithguard and so on). but C: CSM lacked the options to make it work the same. where was the Dark Apostle? where was the War Smith? where were the Cultists? where were the further cult options? simple additions and re-arrangements, like letting bikes be taken as troops, would have allowed what is a pretty solid codex, to have become one of the best in the game. sadly it appears corners were cut (i'm not inclined to blame the games designers, but the directors), and we, the players, were the ones that got burned. worse still so many of us were blinded by past annoyances into ignoring the fact that what we were given instead was no better at all.

Ubermensch Commander
20-01-2009, 18:00
@ Admiral Dick
I am simply saying the drag and drop existed was more prevelant and forced under the old codex.
I also disagree that one cannot make a NL or IW list without specific special rules for each and every faction. Dark Apostle, which existed only the 3.5 codex and perhaps the IA( I cannot recall if the word bearers IA came out before or after codex, since all IA after the codex simply copy and paster rules from the 3.5 codex) was gone along with Court of the Young King for Eldar. Craftworld specific things, such as a Seer council, are now avaliable for all.
Like the old codex, you are still given the building blocks, as you say, only now some of the more.....ridiculous..building blocks are removed. Granted, there are some new absurd ones, but I am glad Lash seems to be the only "broken" build, as opposed to IW pie plate, that Siren build(the name escapes me), and the ever so LOATHED Daemon Bomb. There is LESS aggravation for all the OPPONENTS of Chaos.

You contend that we are blinded by past annoyances, I contend some are blinded by being spoiled by a broken codex to acknowledge that things needed to be changed and going backwards is NOT a necessarily viable route. For example, 4 different lists of god specific wargear? No thank you. Aspiring Champions that could fight as hard as a commander(due to being hidden within ablative units)? No thank you. The sheer volume of FAQ documents and errata for the 3.5 codex is indicative of the issues inherent with the ol book. Not saying this one is perfect, just saying I do not want to see a return to 3.5, and back to the drop and drag, this new list actually allows more variation while allowing themed armies, albeing with shared rules. A Biel Tan Autarch is the same as a Saim Hann Autarch, stats wise. Bad Moon Warboss same as a Goff Warboss. White Scars Commander is same as Ultramarines Commander. So does Chaos get equal treatment, at least in terms of using uniform stats for a boss.

An example of not needing special rules in a different codex is the new SM codex. I do NOT need cleanse and purify to make Salamanders. Nor do I need a special character. Nor do I need initiative 3 or Free thunder hammers on Chaplains. Nor am I upset that Salamanders lost sole rights to Adamantine mantle. It does not diminish the "specialness" or "uniquess" of the item.
Rules change, edition to edition. Ah well. Now if a Raven Guard army suddenly loses access to all scouts, transports, jump infantry, and get rewritten as "The heavy weapons loving foot sloggers of marines"...then I might wonder why the sudden 180 on character and the rules that restrict them to manner of combat so divergent from the fluff.

As for structural re-arrangements, I would agree. There are some things they could have done with the new Chaos Codex in a vein similar to Codex: SM. Cultists should be avaliable for ALL Chaos factions...they kinda run on it.
But as for the Legions specific things, see above point about Seer council and Court of Young King. Some things are now avaliable to all, so that from one basic list you can make faction specific forces. Though I happily admit, a Special Character for each Legion would have been suitable and theoretically easy to do.
And a number of *must have Icon o Khorne/Tzeentch/etc* wargear would not have been terrible...so long as it was a small list. Though didnt they keep many of those in the new codex?

Ok rant over, we have been over all this time and time again. My point was simply, you have a base flexible list, drop and drag is simply like any codex: some units>other units, but the old had manual restrictions built into. Not necessarily a bad thing, as that can build character, but drag and drop is not a fair accusation against the new codex, any more than any other codex. And in this regard, I feel the new one has an advantage over the old.

AUN'SHI
20-01-2009, 18:54
Chaos also brings us the lash/obliterator spam but never use this or you wont get to play anybody


I have read about this in other posts what is it exactly excuse my ignorance.

Death Korp
20-01-2009, 19:00
Why the Possessed hate? :confused:

I've won quite a couple of games because of them, mainly becuase of their str 5. They have killed so many things for me, its great (e.g, Wraithlords, Warbosses and Nobs)! The unpredicatbility can be good and gives them an extra edge, and they are great models to boot too! Even though Beserkers can do some things better, I always stick to my possessed.

Spawn are good too against certain armies like Tau and Guardsmen. The Strength 5 and Toughness 5 makes sure they hit hard and are hard, so they are good at tarring stuff. They also can be a thorn in the side of other armies too, and can contest objectves. Great with the Gift of Chaos power though.

Daemons are good too, in big numbers. The good stats are great when they pop out of no where and attack with loads of attacks. Its more of the suprise factor with them then anything else!
Greater Daemons are awesome too.

Dreadnaughts are handy too. I like mine with Close Combat Weapons so it can charge in, it can be entertaining when it chargrills your own troops!

I'm seriously thinking of going to a Tournament with some of the units above to see how they preform. I wonder if anyone has actually used any of them in a competative environment...

DK

Ravenheart
20-01-2009, 20:36
I have read about this in other posts what is it exactly excuse my ignorance.

Lash spam: The Slaaneshi sorcerer / daemon prince can use a power, that let's you move one of the opponents units 2D6 inches (if I'm not mistaken).
If you have more than one HQ, that can do that it's a spam.

Lash spam isn't too bad by itself, but when you throw a lot of obliterators who can shoot plasma blasts all around; it becomes very dangerous especially for marines equivalent armies.

Worst part: A lot of opponents that run that tactics, try to solely reliy on it. Thus the game can get very samey very fast.

AdmiralDick
20-01-2009, 21:32
I am simply saying the drag and drop existed was more prevelant and forced under the old codex.

i disagree.

in fact most people found the myriad of options for each unit overwhelming, which is one of the reasons why they were cut down.


I also disagree that one cannot make a NL or IW list without specific special rules for each and every faction.

i absolutely agree. but then i don't think i said otherwise.

that being said, if i were given the task of writing a NL and IW codex, i wouldn't simply hand in the current codex each time and expect to get paid.


Dark Apostle, which existed only the 3.5 codex and perhaps the IA( I cannot recall if the word bearers IA came out before or after codex, since all IA after the codex simply copy and paster rules from the 3.5 codex) was gone along with Court of the Young King for Eldar. Craftworld specific things, such as a Seer council, are now avaliable for all.

its a shame that the Court and Dark Apostle were dropped. i would have prefered they they had remained, available to all.


Like the old codex, you are still given the building blocks, as you say, only now some of the more.....ridiculous..building blocks are removed.

i'm curious about which units you think are ridiculous and have been removed. the Dark Apostle? the Warsmith? the Cultists? the cult units?

(i'll happily give you the Basilisk)


Granted, there are some new absurd ones, but I am glad Lash seems to be the only "broken" build, as opposed to IW pie plate, that Siren build(the name escapes me), and the ever so LOATHED Daemon Bomb. There is LESS aggravation for all the OPPONENTS of Chaos.

again, i disagree.


You contend that we are blinded by past annoyances, I contend some are blinded by being spoiled by a broken codex to acknowledge that things needed to be changed and going backwards is NOT a necessarily viable route. For example, 4 different lists of god specific wargear? No thank you. Aspiring Champions that could fight as hard as a commander(due to being hidden within ablative units)? No thank you. The sheer volume of FAQ documents and errata for the 3.5 codex is indicative of the issues inherent with the ol book.

i don't think i fully elucidated what i would have done. but its nothing like you seem to be implying here. so i would advise you against guessing what i think and only comment on what i said.


Not saying this one is perfect, just saying I do not want to see a return to 3.5, and back to the drop and drag,

i don't think i understand what you mean by 'drag-and-drop'. i personally meant that there are few viable options for each unit in the current codex, so there is little forward planning needed. that certainly can't be said of the previous codex (not that i'm saying the choice was always a good thing).


this new list actually allows more variation while allowing themed armies, albeing with shared rules.

again, i don't really understand what you mean by 'more variation'. could you please give an explicit example of the sort of option you have now as opposed to with the previous book.


A Biel Tan Autarch is the same as a Saim Hann Autarch, stats wise. Bad Moon Warboss same as a Goff Warboss. White Scars Commander is same as Ultramarines Commander. So does Chaos get equal treatment, at least in terms of using uniform stats for a boss.

that's a slightly odd choice of units, because they are, of course, standard between forces, because they are not in anyway unique units. that aside, why can i take a Chaplain in any SM army, even those that don't use Chaplains, but i can't take a Dark Apostle in any CSM army, even a WB one?


An example of not needing special rules in a different codex is the new SM codex. I do NOT need cleanse and purify to make Salamanders. Nor do I need a special character. Nor do I need initiative 3 or Free thunder hammers on Chaplains. Nor am I upset that Salamanders lost sole rights to Adamantine mantle. It does not diminish the "specialness" or "uniquess" of the item.

what is it that makes you Salamanders army?

if it is purely the models, then why worry about the rules you use at all? why not use the C: Eldar?

but i digress, as i wasn't advocating unique rules in this particular situation, just better options in general.


Rules change, edition to edition. Ah well. Now if a Raven Guard army suddenly loses access to all scouts, transports, jump infantry, and get rewritten as "The heavy weapons loving foot sloggers of marines"...then I might wonder why the sudden 180 on character and the rules that restrict them to manner of combat so divergent from the fluff.

so... you agree that there has been a 180 with the C: CSM, as the Cult Legions can no longer take units that were once key, and play in a wholly different fashion? :confused:


As for structural re-arrangements, I would agree. There are some things they could have done with the new Chaos Codex in a vein similar to Codex: SM. Cultists should be avaliable for ALL Chaos factions...they kinda run on it.

thus we fundamentally agree, and i'm confused as to why you are disagreeing with me.


But as for the Legions specific things, see above point about Seer council and Court of Young King. Some things are now avaliable to all, so that from one basic list you can make faction specific forces. Though I happily admit, a Special Character for each Legion would have been suitable and theoretically easy to do.

this sounds near identical to the BL codex that i wrote, because i was so disappointed with the lack of genuine options in the current codex.


but drag and drop is not a fair accusation against the new codex, any more than any other codex. And in this regard, I feel the new one has an advantage over the old.

again, i disagree. the Eldar and Ork codexes both have a lot of options within the units themselves and an excellent selection of units which allow armies with very different tactics and play-styles. the C: SM has this to a lesser extent; a lot of the units lack viable options, making them all or nothing, but the selection of units allows dramatically different forces to be compiled.

so far i have seen very, very few CSM armies that vary significantly. they seem like Marvel superheroes from the early 40s, that were the exact same thing with a different uniform. in the past an army that was good against WE (for example) were not necessarily good against DG, that is not generally true any more.

Wiredk
20-01-2009, 23:19
I hate to contribute to the offtopicness, but all the "Oh the new CSM Codex is just fine" people are off base.

I myself started up a word bearers force. There was a tournament recently, and I came up with a list that personified Word Bearers - lots of demons, some solid space marine units, and a lord with a Crozium/demonweapon or powerweapon. I playtested it the night before against several people who were going to be in the tournament, and found the army to be woefully inadequate.

The following day, I came to a tournament with an army using the Lash, Obliterators, a dreadnaught with a plasma cannon, and a Defiler.

I took best general that day.


The point I'm trying to make is that there IS a winning combination in the CSM codex. Is it fun to play? No. Is it fun for other people to play? No. Is it going to win you any sportsmenship scores? Heck no. Is it fluffy? Definatly not. And all of that goes against the #1 rule of 40k: To have fun.

Also, someone mentioned something about the number of options in the CSM Codex over even the new Space marine codex - This is hogwash. Without the content alone the special rules and wargear sections in the Space marine codex are 3x as thick as any other codex.

As for what they changed in the previous codex? All they needed to do was tone down some of the mutations, and change the demons to the deployment they use now, and you would of had a much better and less problematic book than you do now.

rooster27
21-01-2009, 02:37
well i must admit i do use a double lash list with alot of oblitarators but i play a pure slaanesh army meaning no "counts as" with zerkers ect i only use noise marines and chaos marines for troops and i make the whole army fluffy like squads of 6 for slaaneshes number lucius for another leader and the only mark?icon i take is slaanesh and all my oponents dont care to be honest ive been beten by a verey good marrine player useing the double lash list so it is not that bad to use the "spam" list and it is fun makeing a legion or god spacific list and seeing how it works


PS:you might of guessed im obsesed with slaanesh:D

Occulto
21-01-2009, 03:57
I hate to contribute to the offtopicness, but all the "Oh the new CSM Codex is just fine" people are off base.

Um... it is fine.

Not too good for some players who started off in previous editions but jeez it gets tiring having that point brought up over and over. When are we going to be able to talk about Chaos without it turning into a whinge fest about how chaos players got done over by the current codex?

It's just as good as all the other armies out there as long as you approach it on it's own merits. For one thing, mixed gods are here to stay. The chaos codex works best by evaluating each unit (and upgrades) on it's own merits so archaic notions of what is and isn't "fluffy" need to be well and truly ditched.

Trying to play an army written under a previous codex (and by now, previous edition) by new rules is only going to end in tears.


The point I'm trying to make is that there IS a winning combination in the CSM codex. Is it fun to play? No. Is it fun for other people to play? No. Is it going to win you any sportsmenship scores? Heck no. Is it fluffy? Definatly not. And all of that goes against the #1 rule of 40k: To have fun.

Which sounds as if you're saying players are incapable of winning unless they pick one specific list. This is patently untrue.

I have seen numerous examples (and been on the receiving end) of solid and successful chaos armies that don't take the usual boring choices. Such armies admittedly require a bit more thought, but that's no different to any other codex.

Talk about options like possessed being "crap" is pure hysterical exaggeration. You're still looking at a S5, fearless unit with invulnerable saves before you even get to the random roll.

Are there point for point "better" options out there? Depending on your viewpoint, yes. But if you think possessed are a cool addition to your force then there's absolutely no reason not to take them. The most important thing to remember, is that simply having them in your force is not guaranteeing your opponent an auto-win.


Also, someone mentioned something about the number of options in the CSM Codex over even the new Space marine codex - This is hogwash. Without the content alone the special rules and wargear sections in the Space marine codex are 3x as thick as any other codex.

This old chestnut again. Chaos have plenty of options - they're just not a bunch of wargear. Even changing the icon on a squad of CSM varies the role of that unit a lot more than being able to kit out a veteran sergeant with different wargear, or army wide chapter tactics.

The problem seems to be that a lot of players either can't resist the urge of the obvious power combos, or stubbornly refuse to mix powers - in the process using voluntary restrictions then complaining about not having any options.

willydstyle
21-01-2009, 04:25
I agree with everything Occulto said. I'd also like to point out that Chaos Dreadnoughts don't cause you to automatically lose any game you play and make your babies born with extra limbs.

Chaos Dreads are cheap, more effective in CC than any other dreadnought out there, and just a little insane to make up for the fact that they're actually very good units. I HAVE taken my chaos dreadnought in competitive games, and done very well with it.

Of course every time I deploy my obviously-nurgly, or obviously khornate Daemon Princes, my opponent usually asks "is there a lash on that thing?" I generally don't play with Lash of Submission, except for sometimes I take a Black Legion Sorcerer with the Mark of Slaanesh, because I generally play a mechanized build, where Lash is not needed to enhance my own mobility or to gain initiative.

If I were to play an all-infantry chaos list, then Lash would be more useful to me, because chaos does not have the same ways to gain strategic initiative that other armies do: we don't have drop pod assault, or death wing assault, or the ability to make all our troops deepstrike for free, we don't have super-fast transports or any ability to manipulate reserves rolls, and we generally don't have a plethora of long-ranged weaponry.

Lash just feels really bad for your opponent because you're actually manipulating his miniatures, but I don't see it as being THAT much worse than the other mechanics that I mentioned.

Ubermensch Commander
21-01-2009, 05:56
iworse still so many of us were blinded by past annoyances into ignoring the fact that what we were given instead was no better at all.

This quote is what i was "implying" you said. If I misread this comment, my apologies.

As for the rest, we have been over this again and again and again.

New Point howver, I did not say I thought Raven Guard did a 180 and it is ludicrous to try and say the Chaos codex did that as well.
Are berserkers still assaulty? Yes. Are Death Guard still durable? YES. Are Obliterators still annoying swiss army knives of hvy weaponry? Yes. The point I was trying to make there was that the rules change the function and strengths of various units, but as long as they still hold to some fundamental nature, its all gravy.

I use the Eldar and Ork examples to show the trend and an example of how the Chaos codex is just like the others. Some builds/ units were lost or altered as were faction specific rules. The various factions in each army list now share units. Hence, now no Warsmith specific rules nor Dark Apostle rules SPECIFICALLy as many factions have lost that. C'est la vie.
Since it is one large flexible list, the statement of Drop and Drag is not applicable since there MORE options open to players for a wider variety of builds. Since power gaming/cheesy/tournament builds exist in all codices, it is not a valid charge to say this current Chaos codex is drop and drag simply because of Lash lists. Yes there are obvious choices. But drag and drop implies all or majority army lists will have identical builds. Old Choas codex, with although a wider array of imbalanced options, forced choices into each sublist(World Eaters may only take X but not Y etc etc) So you had more carbon copy lists.

So, tabling all other issues, as they have been discussed ad nausem, Drag and drop(as I understand the term to mean) is no more a fair accusation against this codex than any other.

meanmachine
21-01-2009, 08:51
CHAOS:)
Chaos have a much better troop selection than space marines (which is what the game is all about now)

Chaos standard marines have 1 more attack than space marines and their cheaper in points

Chaos have daemon prince which are lethal for their points cost

Chaos don't have bloodthirters, bloodletters, flesh hounds or any other named daemons anymore, they have standard generic greater daemons and daemons
(not really worth taking)


SPACEMARINES:mad:
Space marines have more special characters, taking 1 special character will change you whole armies tactics, you'll get a special ability for the whole army e.g kayvan shrike gives yor whole army fleet of foot

space marines gain a major advantage due to having "shall know no fear" and
"combat tactics"

the chaos land raider is totally crap compaired to the spacemarines
(marines have 3 chaos have 1, chaos don't have a machine spirit anymore, if the chaos land raider moves 1"-6" it can only fire 1 gun, the space marines land raider can move 12" and fire 1 gun or 1"-6" and fie 2 guns) the land raider crusader can move 6" and fire all 4 of its weapons

marines now have terminators with a 2+ armour save and 3+ INVULNERABLE SAVE

marines have lots more faster units than chaos

marines have more dreadnoughts then chaos.

I USE CHAOS BECAUSE I LIKE THEIR MODELS AN STORY LINE BUT I MUST SAY IF YOUR IN IT TO WIN GAMES GO FOR SPACE MARINES, THEY HAVE THE UPPERHAND

Noserenda
21-01-2009, 10:07
A point nobody else raised, Chaos Marines are also VERY good at small points values. With their Troops being equivalent to most armies elites :chrome:

squeekenator
21-01-2009, 10:20
Bitch, bitch, bitch.

Seriously, can't you guys give it a break? Just because a thread has the word 'Chaos' in its title does not mean that it's a new vs. old codex thread. It's the same arguments, over and over again, no side ever changing or doing anything constructive. Can't you just accept that not everyone has the same opinion as you and move on? I admit that it takes a great amount of effort for me to not chime in now, but come on. The question was "Are Chaos Marines a good starting race?". There is absolutely no reason to compare the new codex to the old one in order to answer that question. You'd have to be actively trying to open this tired old can of beans to make that connection. Chaos Marines are currently pretty powerful and forgiving, done. No need to mention any old codexes.

Noserenda
21-01-2009, 10:49
Hehe, i had to restrain myself too, but then nowadays I just translate Chaos Codex bitching into "Blah blah blah" It bears mentioning too that ive got two regular Chaos opponents, neither use Lash and they are both challenging opponents with radically different armies. 1 uses Beserkers and CSM backed with Dreads, the other Noise marines and Obliterators with Warptime Princes.

AmBlam
21-01-2009, 13:08
I'll admit Chaos could be attractive to a new player for a few reasons but my advice is to stay away. Chaos will let you down in the long run.

Do not listern to people that do not play chaos. They are in these threads for themselves.

Lucky
21-01-2009, 13:12
AmBlam: Do you mind expanding on why they'll let you down?

willydstyle
21-01-2009, 13:15
I'll admit Chaos could be attractive to a new player for a few reasons but my advice is to stay away. Chaos will let you down in the long run.

Do not listern to people that do not play chaos. They are in these threads for themselves.

I'm not sure what you mean by "they're in these threads for themselves."

Anyways, I've been playing chaos for 15 years, and I haven't been "let down" by them yet. I love the fact that a lot of the basic models look really good, but at the same time there's just tons and tons of room for conversion in the army list, so if down the road you get into that aspect of the hobby there's tons of room to expand. Also, while some people consider them to be a "forgiving" army they are also very competitive right now, so if you get into the tournament scene you'll do fine too. I've been having so much fun with my chaos for so long, that I'm only now building a second army, and only that because I won a 90 box set in a tourney.

Brucopeloso
21-01-2009, 13:35
One more aspect of chaos that has been overlooked so far: orks are getting more and more popular and chaos seems to be better equipped to deal with them than normal marines, khorne berzerkers and plaguemarines are pretty nasty against orks and 10 standard chaos marines on the charge are no joke either.

meanmachine
21-01-2009, 13:52
One more aspect of chaos that has been overlooked so far: orks are getting more and more popular and chaos seems to be better equipped to deal with them than normal marines, khorne berzerkers and plaguemarines are pretty nasty against orks and 10 standard chaos marines on the charge are no joke either.

space marines have tons more flamer options than chaos.

And with the salamander special character their flamers are twice as good.

marines have the thunderfire cannons for stopping orks.

chaos have 2 largeblast weapons in the codex, marines have 3

marines have many more fast moving units for dodgeing orks

so what you said about chaos being better prepaired for orks than marines is s**t sorry for my language.

Askari
21-01-2009, 14:09
space marines have tons .... blah

Chaos Space Marines (squad) has double the attacks of a Tactical Squad being charged by Orks.
Ergo, twice as effective vs. Orks.

Chaos Space Marines also have cheap terminators [which Orks will struggle to beat the armour of] and Obliterators [which are evil against, well, everything and everyone].

To the just starting Codex ranting and my own brain: resist, you've been here before many a time.... don't join in.....

Aaaand finally the original poster:

Chaos Space Marines are very forgiving, being Space Marines that can typically dish out a little more damage while being able to take slightly less [due to Morale actually doing something opposed to nothing, Fearless, and equally low, if not lower, model count]. Even their Troops choices are as powerful as most armies Elites, the assault-specialist Berserkers, anti-Horde Noise Marines, tough-as-nails Plague Marines and anti-MEQ Thousand Sons.

They are also, fun :)

Brucopeloso
21-01-2009, 14:21
space marines have tons more flamer options than chaos. And with the salamander special character their flamers are twice as good. marines have the thunderfire cannons for stopping orks.
chaos have 2 largeblast weapons in the codex, marines have 3
marines have many more fast moving units for dodgeing orks
so what you said about chaos being better prepaired for orks than marines is s**t sorry for my language.

Yup, however chaos marine lists can deal with orks even without specifically tooling up against them or taking special carachters, which supports the view that chaos is a pretty nice and forgiving army to play.

At meanmachine, you are perfectly free to disagree with me and I will respect you and your opinion, from your part however please mind your language.

grizzly ruin
21-01-2009, 16:32
When are we going to be able to talk about Chaos without it turning into a whinge fest about how chaos players got done over by the current codex?

When CSM get a new codex.




Talk about options like possessed being "crap" is pure hysterical exaggeration. You're still looking at a S5, fearless unit with invulnerable saves before you even get to the random roll.

Who have no reliable means of bypassing armor, you can compare these guys to any of a half a dozen other elite melee units in the game and they will come up short, point for point.




Are there point for point "better" options out there? Depending on your viewpoint, yes. But if you think possessed are a cool addition to your force then there's absolutely no reason not to take them.

What do those two things have to do with each other?

Do they have cool models and great fluff? Yes.

Will you auto-lose by taking them in your force? No.

Do they have poor rules, and are they out shined not only by other armies' elite melee killers but by units in their own codex? Yes.


Why is it ok to read other threads on DE, Necrons, IG, etc. and read about their poor performing units as a matter of course, but not in Chaos Threads? :rolleyes:

Ubermensch Commander
21-01-2009, 17:34
@ Grizzly Ruin
Because Chaos players whined for thread upon thread over a book that is fundamentally solid.

Ubermensch Commander
21-01-2009, 17:48
Since the edit button is not appearing on my comp right now, let me amend my previous post this way:
Because people have different opinions on tactical viability. Some forum goers swear by their possessed. Other curse them as vile and worthless.
There is a thread on warseer currently with a player arguing that Tactical Marines are not worthwhile. People will simpyl disagree.
As for why Chaos is "unaccetable" is my previous post, which, while overly snarky, contains a great deal of truth to it.

And I believe Occulto was pointing out that Possessed do not suck so much as people moan, and that if you think they are cool you can put them in your army and still win battles.

Madfool2
21-01-2009, 17:51
Why is it ok to read other threads on DE, Necrons, IG, etc. and read about their poor performing units as a matter of course, but not in Chaos Threads? :rolleyes:

Generally because they don't turn into whine and cry threads.

AdmiralDick
21-01-2009, 19:43
New Point howver, I did not say I thought Raven Guard did a 180 and it is ludicrous to try and say the Chaos codex did that as well.

i am actually finding this discussion with you extremely difficult, because it doesn't seem to me that you are responding to what i'm saying, but to what you'd like me to have said.


So, tabling all other issues, as they have been discussed ad nausem, Drag and drop(as I understand the term to mean) is no more a fair accusation against this codex than any other.

then it seems any discussion we have will continue to be fruitless, because i clearly cannot help you to see what i am trying to explain; because there is a vast gulf between the C: CSM and other codexes in the concept i'm talking about.


A point nobody else raised, Chaos Marines are also VERY good at small points values. With their Troops being equivalent to most armies elites :chrome:

that is actually a very good point (and has always been the case with Chaos). it does mean that CSM is a very good place to dip your toes into the 40k pool.


The question was "Are Chaos Marines a good starting race?". There is absolutely no reason to compare the new codex to the old one in order to answer that question.

that particular question doesn't need much reference to the past, but it was not the only question that was asked. questions about daemons and Legion special rules do rather point to discussions about the previous book.


nowadays I just translate Chaos Codex bitching into "Blah blah blah"

personally, i find it more disappointing when people try to make legitimate complaints appear like silly caricatures.

Occulto
22-01-2009, 00:07
When CSM get a new codex.

That's going to be a long time to remain angry.


Who have no reliable means of bypassing armor, you can compare these guys to any of a half a dozen other elite melee units in the game and they will come up short, point for point.

Something I'm always worried about when facing a horde of lowly armored models like Orks or Daemons with their masses of invulnerable saves. ;)


Why is it ok to read other threads on DE, Necrons, IG, etc. and read about their poor performing units as a matter of course, but not in Chaos Threads? :rolleyes:

Oh I dunno, maybe because they haven't just received a new codex relatively recently. :eyebrows:

In a couple of years time, if every thread about IG or Necrons still descends into complaints about how the older codex was so much better whatever the original topic, then you'll be seeing me sink the boot in.

But bloody hell, this topic is about whether Chaos is good for a starter (which it is), not yet another round of the same comparisons with the previous version.

Madfool2
22-01-2009, 00:22
Chaos is great for starters, you can paint them quite easily, harder than your average loyalist, but that makes it more fun if your into that sorta thing.

Army wise, CSM's (of the undivided variety) are quite forgiving and fun. They do shooting and CC well, as the standard chaos space marine is one of the best troops in the 40k game.

squeekenator
22-01-2009, 02:40
that particular question doesn't need much reference to the past, but it was not the only question that was asked. questions about daemons and Legion special rules do rather point to discussions about the previous book.

Hardly. They ask if there are god-specific daemons and legions, you say no. Done. The only reason that would lead into a discussion about when they did have both is if you were trying to drag yet another thread down and turn it into a flame- and troll-fest.

willydstyle
22-01-2009, 05:14
Chaos is great for starters, you can paint them quite easily, harder than your average loyalist, but that makes it more fun if your into that sorta thing.

Army wise, CSM's (of the undivided variety) are quite forgiving and fun. They do shooting and CC well, as the standard chaos space marine is one of the best troops in the 40k game.

Don't get me wrong, I love my black-clad-steel-booted Black Legionnaires, but playing with cult troops is more "forgiving" because they're fearless and generally tougher in one way or another. If a CSM squad loses a combat by even a couple of points, they'll break and either get cut down, or be unable to regroup, losing you a large number of points and models.

laudarkul
22-01-2009, 05:38
Playing CSM for a new starter is ok...But could become expensive 'cause it will take you some time to make your perfect list (not a cheese list but the list which you like/is perfect for your soul(this of course belong to one of chaos Gods:D)); and 'till then you will buy a lot of stuff.

grizzly ruin
23-01-2009, 01:36
Because people have different opinions on tactical viability. Some forum goers swear by their possessed. Other curse them as vile and worthless.


While I understand Occulto's position, in that you can take possessed because you think they are fun, I haven't seen anyone extol the actual usefulness or virtues of possessed with any regularity, vigor or believability on these boards.




Generally because they don't turn into whine and cry threads.

That's right I forgot, anyone except CSM players can complain. When CSM players complain, it's automatically whining and crying.

Thanks for reminding me.





Something I'm always worried about when facing a horde of lowly armored models like Orks or Daemons with their masses of invulnerable saves. ;)

You don't need a 26 point guy to murder hapless hordes, your basic CSM can do that just as well and Berzerkers can do it better and cheaper.

Hell you could even get 2 Lesser Daemons for every 1 possessed, and swarm your enemy right back - and have an extra 2~4 scoring units as well.

What is the purpose of possessed if not to be an elite melee assault unit?

They do not fill that function adequately, that's my problem with the unit.




Oh I dunno, maybe because they haven't just received a new codex relatively recently. :eyebrows:

A unit does not have to be old for it's rules to be poor.

See spawn.




In a couple of years time, if every thread about IG or Necrons still descends into complaints about how the older codex was so much better whatever the original topic, then you'll be seeing me sink the boot in.

It's not even the old CSM dex that gets me, Orks and SMs are leaps and bounds better codexes. They have more character, they're more interesting and most importantly they give the player more choices and options.




But bloody hell, this topic is about whether Chaos is good for a starter (which it is), not yet another round of the same comparisons with the previous version.


You're right.

To the OP, the CSM codex is a strong starter army as long as you stick to the good units and not the poorly concieved ones.

HQ
Unless you're playing competitively, you can go with any of the HQs. That being said, you'll get the best mileage out of Daemon Princes. If you have the points, take two of them.

Elites
You'll get your points worth from Terminators and Chosen, though you will need to build your strategy around them especially at lower points games.

Troops
In the troops section, it's hard to go wrong. But the strongest units are Plague Marines, Berzerkers and basic CSMs. Basic CSMs are a great starting point, they should always have an Icon of Chaos Glory. Feel free to spend a lot of points on troops.

Fast Attack
Generally, you'll find yourself skipping fast attack unless you really have some theme or really want one of the units in there for theme or flavor. Out the available units, Raptors are very solid - but you're still probably better off with basic CSMs.

Heavy Support
Heavy Section has very good options. Obliterators, Defilers, Vindicatiors. Havocs are ok, but Oblits or more basic CSMs (or even chosen) are usually better. Unless you like shooting you're own guys, and exposing your rear armor - avoid Dreads.

Good luck.

AmBlam
24-01-2009, 09:08
AmBlam: Do you mind expanding on why they'll let you down?

Chaos have no HELL in them. Its a big statement that I cannot back up but what Chaos don't have is mostly intangible, the very substance of WH40K. You're armies will be dragged and dropped from:

Sorcerers, Daemon princes, CSMs, Plague Marines, Berzerkers, Thousand Sons, Land raiders, Predators, Terminators and Obliterators.

Which amounts to a low mileage codex.

Starting Chaos would be like investing in the American housing market.

Plastic Parody
24-01-2009, 10:29
Obviously a lot of folk are unhappy with the current dex and a few take every opportunity to let the world know. As another poster said its all really 'bla bla bla' for most of us as we have heard it so so many times - we get the point.

That said, for a new player they are a good army with many powerful, flexible options including arguably the best troop selections in the game. To the OP I'd say do any army you can other than loyalist marines purely as they are the most common army. Its nice to fight someone not using the same dex...

Shamfrit
24-01-2009, 11:07
I've just started playing Chaos Space Marines Jedi, so allow me to offer a few thoughts without the Old Vs. New steaming pile of bull poo that everyone else seems to be regretfully involving themselves with:

HQ

I'm running a Terminator Lord of Slaanesh, with Blissgiver and a Personal Icon. Cheap, well guarded, quick, nasty. Also alongside him is a Chaos Sorceror of Slaanesh, Personal Icon, Lash of Submission. (I use it purely because I'm running virtually all troops, and it's to derail Snipers, and Dark Reapers in cover, because they're impossibly hard to kill otherwise. I've no use for the Daemon Prince, he's not customisable enough, and I like to deepstrike my Lord down on his own behind lines, usually he dies, but not before getting off a charge or two. The special characters are very good for the most part, but all expensive, except perhaps for Kharn, who is by and by the best combat character I can think of. I5+ lords are good too, especially against Power Weapon wielding Eldar, who will likely rip your terminators a new one without taking casulties back otherwise.

Troops

I'm of the opinion that Nurgle and Tzeentch are two steaming piles of poo, points wise, model wise, rules wise. So I won't advice for or against using them, I do however find Slaaneshi Marines (Icon of, not noise marines) to be highly effective defensive units, because they normally attack first when charged, and have 3 STR4 attacks on the charge either way, (assault even, I'm a fantasy player at heart,) they don't really need Khorne, or Nurgle (because Berserkers are better if you want Khorne, obviously. 4 STR5 on the charge is not to be scoffed at.)

Plasmaguns are my weapon of choice, a single squad of 8 Slaaneshi Marines, a plasmagun, beautiful. And cheap, so I run 3 of them, with the third being larger usually, to house the Sorceror.

Fast

I LOVE RAPTORS.

I'll say again.

I LOVE RAPTORS.

Deepstrike Assault troops, 3 attacks each on the assault, can carry to plasmaguns, or meltaguns or flamers, so they can double up either as rear armour popping drop troops, or can dislodge cover hidden troops, and do it slightly cheaper than terminators but what's more, they can drop, destroy, and withdraw quickly. A squad of 7 with two plamaguns is 170 points by all means, but they're the best Fast option there is, with two + rolls. I love the models too!

Heavy

Now we're spoilt for choice. Seriously spoilt. I don't like using Obliterators too much because 75 points a pop for a single heavy weapon, all be it ona heavy sturdy deep striking body isn't much use when you've no tanks to face. They're situational, so don't rely on them - if you've not got anti tank elsewhere then they're invaluable, but I'd put the points into a Landraider over Obliterators anyday.

Defilers are mean. 2 Close Combat Weapons all the time for me, and the Battlecannon acting as suppression fire as it skitters like a waterbug over the table to tear anything it fancies a new one is fun fun fun for 150! The downside is it's Initiative, leaving it prone to Avatars or anything that can hit and tear it apart before it can devastate things. It also virtually never gets a cover save, so two of them will ensure one gets to where it needs to be! Tank hunter and suppression fire onto troop choices, bargain!

Land Raider. Whilst it's not got 'oooo machine esprit!11!' it does have twin-linked sponsons and weaponry, which combines nicely with Daemonic Possession (drops BS to 3, but with twin-linked it's not a problem,) you ignore crew shaken and crew stunned, so it's not exactly 'rubbish.' Whack a squad of Khorne Berserkers in one of those and drive it full speed across the table, watch those Berserkers rampage through anything, and then blow up stuff as a fire base (pretty much like marines, but SPIKEY!)

Predators are very cheap and if positioned correctly can provide a high rate of fire and be impenetrable to STR6/7 weaponry spamming, like Eldar weaponry. Two Heavy Bolters and an Autocannon and a Havoc Launcher for good measure is very cheap at 115 points. Good suppression support for troops.

Havocs are up to you, I dislike them personally.

I think that's enough to be gettign on with though :D

AdmiralDick
24-01-2009, 12:32
Hardly. They ask if there are god-specific daemons and legions, you say no. Done. The only reason that would lead into a discussion about when they did have both is if you were trying to drag yet another thread down and turn it into a flame- and troll-fest.

lol. why are you still even discussing this? if the idea of arguing off topic is so annoying to you, why do you keep doing it? what does your post add to the conversation about whether the current book is good for newbs?

however, as i think the question has been amply answered, and i have no issue discussing the merits of the game rules compared to other rules, i'm cool with carrying on this trail:

the question of god-specific daemons and Legion special rules was clearly a question about changes the Jedi152 had heard were made to the book. whether you want to accept that or not, its the truth. and as you suggested, most of the posters simply said, there once were such rules and now there are not.

as far as i can see, the post that started off topic conversation made by Ubermensch Commander, and it had nothing to do with daemons or legions, it had to do with the way armies were constructed from both books. and i'm not convinced that UC is a fan of the previous codex, so i don't think you can pin the blame for this off-topic-ness that seems to ire you so on anyone who 'whines' and 'moans' about the current book.

but then i've found that that's the way all of these threads work.

grizzly ruin
24-01-2009, 13:43
Troops

I'm of the opinion that Nurgle and Tzeentch are two steaming piles of poo, points wise, model wise, rules wise. So I won't advice for or against using them, :D


I'm going to ask you to back up why you think a 24 point T4(5) FNP 3+ save Marine, who can sit in cover, is a "steaming pile of poo'.

Keep in mind they can carry double specials at under 10 men and are about as easy to remove from cover as pulling bricks out of a wall with your bare hands.

It's one thing to have an opinion and another to back it up with a reason, Plague Marines are easily one of the top units in the entire troops section, if not the codex - and they make up a large majority of the winning CSM lists at tournaments.

willydstyle
24-01-2009, 14:05
Chaos have no HELL in them. Its a big statement that I cannot back up but what Chaos don't have is mostly intangible, the very substance of WH40K. You're armies will be dragged and dropped from:

Sorcerers, Daemon princes, CSMs, Plague Marines, Berzerkers, Thousand Sons, Land raiders, Predators, Terminators and Obliterators.

Which amounts to a low mileage codex.

Starting Chaos would be like investing in the American housing market.

Except I would add: Greater Daemons, Noise Marines, Havocs, Dreadnoughts (yes, even the much-maligned chaos dreadnought) and Raptors to this list, which turns into a decent amount of variety. I mention these units because I've done very well with all of them on a regular basis, not just in a "OMG one time I killed a whole bane blade company when I rolled 12 6's in a row with my..." way.

Greater Daemons: for 140 points (counting the minimum cost of the champion) You're getting a Daemon that's almost as good as the Avatar, but with a slightly worse save, and more attacks, definitely worth it, but tricky to include in a list.

Noise Marines: one of the only troops choices in the game that can take a heavy weapon below maximum size, has good firepower on the move, and excellent mid-range firepower when stationary. They kill both hordes and marines with equal alacrity when given a blast master.

Havocs: An excellent heavy support choice for fighting horde armies. When the Orks get close, the obliterators have to use their flamers and pray, the predators have to move away 12" so they don't get owned in the butt by a klaw, but the havocs cry fury and let loose the dogs of war. A heavy weapon trooper that fights as good as a chaos marine is also much less vulnerable to those small elite units that are designed to suicide vehicles or tie up things like devastators in close combat.

Dreadnoughts:An extra attack with a DCCW at no premium in price over their Imperial cousins makes them worth it. NOT a fire support unit. They can be dangerous to your army 1/6 times on the first turn, but after that are pure gold if you get a good run roll, and set up appropriately. Use it as a fire magnet to take the heat off your rhinos, because nobody wants to let this sucker get close.

Raptors: Yes, they're nearly identical, except with worse leadership rules, to their Imperial counterpart, and for a slight premium in points. However, as the chaos codex has many fewer fast options, they are slightly more valuable in the list. They don't shine in any one area over other units in the codex, but they can be where you need them to be on a consistent basis, which is golden.

Znail
24-01-2009, 14:25
Raptors: Yes, they're nearly identical, except with worse leadership rules, to their Imperial counterpart, and for a slight premium in points. However, as the chaos codex has many fewer fast options, they are slightly more valuable in the list. They don't shine in any one area over other units in the codex, but they can be where you need them to be on a consistent basis, which is golden.

Or you could even compare them with Vanguard veterans as if you give them Icon of Khorne so have they equal attacks, althou alot cheaper as you get the jump packs for free (ok, 5 points more for 5 Raptors, but cheaper for any unit size more then that). Raptors are pretty fairly priced and obviously alot better then the costs the SM special chapters still have to pay. Only real problem is that you dont need them that much as the basic CSM can handle their own in assault so you dont have to use dedicated assault units if you dont want to.

Shamfrit
24-01-2009, 15:01
I'm going to ask you to back up why you think a 24 point T4(5) FNP 3+ save Marine, who can sit in cover, is a "steaming pile of poo'.

Keep in mind they can carry double specials at under 10 men and are about as easy to remove from cover as pulling bricks out of a wall with your bare hands.

It's one thing to have an opinion and another to back it up with a reason, Plague Marines are easily one of the top units in the entire troops section, if not the codex - and they make up a large majority of the winning CSM lists at tournaments.

By all means; it's down to play style. Not only do I dislike Nurgle from a fluff perspective, but in the terms of how I'd like to play, and how I play, a slow (initiative terms, not movement) expensive unit doesn't cut it with me. Slaaneshi basic marines are a fair bit cheaper and do the same job, yes, they don't have the better toughness and Feel No Pain, but they can take Eldar down much quicker, avoiding Rending, Power Weapons and the like.

I'd take Khorne Berserkers or Noise marines over Plague Marines any day, Berserkers for Landraidering, Noise Marines for serious firepower and dedicated anti-MEW, heck, get lucky with the Blastmaster and you can pop two tanks in a single shot (I mean very lucky.)

Not to mention, Feel No Pain doesn't prevent breaking, whereas the Fearless for the Noisemarines would, and the Berserkers, if they're doing their jon right, won't usually be breaking.

So on that note I retract 'rules' from my list of poo reasons, and stick to 'I just plain hate the models and feel to Nurgle.'

That suit you better? :D

The_Outsider
24-01-2009, 15:14
ITT we skew the OP's view of chaos due to the love/hate relationship warseer has for the chaos codex (both sides are deeply entrenched in their views).

To summarise: chaos are a great starting force, you can make as many fluffy lists as you like as well as power builds (neither of which exlude the other).

Chaos offers excellent versatility without sacrificing too much specialism even if this does rack up the points somewhat and withotu a doubt the best troops section in the game.

Be it an IW gunline army or a renegade assault force, the chaos codex can do it all.

grizzly ruin
24-01-2009, 15:37
By all means; it's down to play style. Not only do I dislike Nurgle from a fluff perspective, but in the terms of how I'd like to play, and how I play, a slow (initiative terms, not movement) expensive unit doesn't cut it with me. Slaaneshi basic marines are a fair bit cheaper and do the same job, yes, they don't have the better toughness and Feel No Pain, but they can take Eldar down much quicker, avoiding Rending, Power Weapons and the like.

It seems like you're comparing them as assault units, which is really not what PMs are designed as.

So yes, it's playstyle and really has nothing to do with the unit's ability.




I'd take Khorne Berserkers or Noise marines over Plague Marines any day, Berserkers for Landraidering, Noise Marines for serious firepower and dedicated anti-MEW, heck, get lucky with the Blastmaster and you can pop two tanks in a single shot (I mean very lucky.)

Right, more assault.

Also, when you say serious firepower are you talking about only the Blastmaster or Sonic Blasters as well?

Sonics would make the NMs more expensive than PMs, and significantly more delicate simultaneously. So I'm assuming you mean only with a Blastmaster.

In which case I think you'll be surprised comparing the killing potential of 2 Plasmaguns for 10 points cheaper than the Blastmaster. The Blastmaster is more versatile, and has better range capability - but I think it's overpriced.





Not to mention, Feel No Pain doesn't prevent breaking, whereas the Fearless for the Noisemarines would,

Plague Marines are Fearless.

What Feel no Pain, Fearless and T4(5) do, combined with 3+ armor save and a possible cover save is create a unit that can pretty much laugh at the enemy's small arms fire. And if the enemy chooses to focus heavy weapons on your Troops, he's not firing them at other threats like Deamon Princes, Obliterators, etc. But that's one list, and one strategy (Target Saturation), and isn't the be all end all of CSM lists (though it's definitely one of the strongest)




So on that note I retract 'rules' from my list of poo reasons, and stick to 'I just plain hate the models and feel to Nurgle.'

That suit you better? :D


Much.

Mostly due to not wanting to steer the OP wrong. I'm not actually a Nurgle fan myself, but I love Plague Marines and Nurgle HQs and Troops in the CSM dex have made out extremely well this time around.

Wiredk
24-01-2009, 16:40
Grizzly,

I've seen PMs eaten up too quickly in CC. They can be tough, but one or two power weapons and its all over. oh, and plasma cannons. When your opponent can take 9 of them on servitors - ALONG WITH 3 demolisher cannons- , than you're not going to have much of a chance.

Wiredk
24-01-2009, 16:47
Don't get me wrong, I love my black-clad-steel-booted Black Legionnaires, but playing with cult troops is more "forgiving" because they're fearless and generally tougher in one way or another. If a CSM squad loses a combat by even a couple of points, they'll break and either get cut down, or be unable to regroup, losing you a large number of points and models.

I dunno about Fearless being more forgiving... Lets ignore Combat Tactics/ATSKNF for a moment here.

Fearless means that: You can be tied up by a high armor walker(Soulgrinder, Ironclad), or some other monsterous creature and never have a chance of escape.

Fearless means that: if you're going against one of the many better Hand to hand units out there, you're going to take a bunch more saves than you would without it.

Well, just two I can think of for now :p On the other side of the coin, You'll never fall back from a tank shock or shooting!

Wiredk
24-01-2009, 16:54
To summarise: chaos are a great starting force, you can make as many fluffy lists as you like as well as power builds (neither of which exlude the other).
it all.

Word bearers. No, Seriously, Make a word bearers list that uses CSM and demons. You're going to be sorely under performing. You can do iron legion ok now - although our iron legion player packed his army up in protest. You CANT do alpha legion, although You can ALMOST emulate by maxing out on chosen - but thats not exactly what the alpha legion was about. Nightlords, same deal. Even with the four gods lists you fall a bit short with only their basic troops being there. No, an icon on a squad of terminators does NOT make them Thousand Sons termies. The moment you pop the icon(why do people ignore that this happens? I see it all the time! Are they not reading the wound allocation rules?) they stop being piles of sand driving powersuits.

grizzly ruin
24-01-2009, 16:59
Grizzly,

I've seen PMs eaten up too quickly in CC. They can be tough, but one or two power weapons and its all over.

Yep, power weapons/fists in CC is one of their weak points.

To be fair however, none of the other troops (particularly in the discussion) are any more resilient against power weapons, except for Thousand Sons - who are an something of an overspecialized unit.

Nor are any of them (aside from TSons) any more resilient against any of the other things you go on to mention.





oh, and plasma cannons. When your opponent can take 9 of them on servitors - ALONG WITH 3 demolisher cannons- , than you're not going to have much of a chance.


Well, cover helps. But those weapons pretty much wreck everybody. So it's not something localized to Plague Marines.

If your point is that PMs aren't invulnerable, I never said they were. Just that they are easily some of the most resilient troops against small arms fire in the entire game.

Wiredk
24-01-2009, 17:06
Atleast Tsuns and everyone else get to strike AT initiative vs power weapons :p the low initiative of Plague marines really hurts. Orks love them to pieces. Literally.

My point was plague marines Seem tough, but in reality they're no better than a CSM.

and about cover? yea I understand theres supposed to be cover. The problem is that NO ONE - atleast around here - plays with enough terrain for cover saves to be part of the game. I'll take a picture of the numerous attempts at Planet Bowling Ball, or Planet Comb Over once my camera phone gets replaced.

LegendFX
24-01-2009, 17:20
I recently got into a Deathguard themed army. Im using 2 type's of troop choices.

1. Plaguemarines, basicly just using them to soak up enemy fire on objectives.
2. Berzekers, or Shock troopers, As I aptly renamed them :P And of course, I'll be using them to lure my enemies into close combat.

For my 1000 point army, ( just as an indication ) Ill be using:

1 Lord or Sorc, havent decided yet.
1x 7 Plague marines with a rhino
1x 7 plague marines with a rhino
1x 7 bererkers with a rhino
2 or 3 Oblitorators.

AmBlam
24-01-2009, 17:44
To the OP:

Being a new player is virtually no different from any other player imho. If you like the army enough you will do the hard conversion work etc anyway and enjoy it. So if you have to ask whether you should play Chaos I would say the answer is a firm "No".

I don't think the viability of a Greater Demon has ever had any influence on most people's army choice.

The_Outsider
24-01-2009, 20:00
Word bearers. No, Seriously, Make a word bearers list that uses CSM and demons. You're going to be sorely under performing.

Errr...no?

A themed force can be as powerful as one that takes whatever it wants - you just have to approach specific problems from different angles.




You can do iron legion ok now - although our iron legion player packed his army up in protest. You CANT do alpha legion, although You can ALMOST emulate by maxing out on chosen - but thats not exactly what the alpha legion was about. Nightlords, same deal. Even with the four gods lists you fall a bit short with only their basic troops being there. No, an icon on a squad of terminators does NOT make them Thousand Sons termies. The moment you pop the icon(why do people ignore that this happens? I see it all the time! Are they not reading the wound allocation rules?) they stop being piles of sand driving powersuits.

And? No codex allows you to do a true 1:1 fluff force because no codex goes than in depth, nor are the legions that one diemensional that (say) AL are solely defined by infiltrate.

Any force, chaos or otherwise is defined by personal choice and paint scheme.

An Iyanden force doesn't have to have tons of wraith units, plenty of guardians are still fluffy and so are aspect squads - you will probably not take as many as say a biel tan force as that is your theme.

Rules do not dictate fluff - if they did the game would be spectacularly boring.

willydstyle
25-01-2009, 06:40
I dunno about Fearless being more forgiving... Lets ignore Combat Tactics/ATSKNF for a moment here.

Fearless means that: You can be tied up by a high armor walker(Soulgrinder, Ironclad), or some other monsterous creature and never have a chance of escape.

Fearless means that: if you're going against one of the many better Hand to hand units out there, you're going to take a bunch more saves than you would without it.

Well, just two I can think of for now :p On the other side of the coin, You'll never fall back from a tank shock or shooting!

Fists are almost compulsory in most squads to make them viable against walkers and independent characters, so if you choose not to take them, then yes, you can get tied up.

And how exactly is "taking a bunch more saves" not incredibly millions of times better than simply being wiped out for being NOT fearless?

decker_cky
25-01-2009, 07:02
With decent initiative and good leadership, the non-fearless stuff can break and rally to shoot next turn, or hold on a passed break test. Fearless stuff is in combat for better or worse, and will take hits no matter what.

willydstyle
25-01-2009, 07:18
With decent initiative and good leadership, the non-fearless stuff can break and rally to shoot next turn, or hold on a passed break test. Fearless stuff is in combat for better or worse, and will take hits no matter what.

I have never, ever in 5th edition had a CSM squad rally. Either they're wiped out by sweeping advance, or they're knocked below half, or they're still within 6" of the baddy. It's not just due to bad luck, it's due to game mechanics. Fearless is much better than non-fearless, ATSKNF is better than both.

Znail
25-01-2009, 07:42
I have never, ever in 5th edition had a CSM squad rally. Either they're wiped out by sweeping advance, or they're knocked below half, or they're still within 6" of the baddy. It's not just due to bad luck, it's due to game mechanics. Fearless is much better than non-fearless, ATSKNF is better than both.

I have actualy seen units rally a few times, but its pretty rare. So I agree that fearless is far better then not having it. The only real advantage with not having it is that you may consider it an advantage to have the enemy exposed to your fire on your turn after breaking your unit.

grizzly ruin
25-01-2009, 08:43
Atleast Tsuns and everyone else get to strike AT initiative vs power weapons :p the low initiative of Plague marines really hurts. Orks love them to pieces. Literally.

Well they still have to wound T 4(5) with basic CC attacks, so while they might get to go first they're doing less wounds than usual vs. say CSMs or TSuns.

Not to mention that you can just sit there and let your enemy charge you with plague marines (unless you want to try and deny them furious charge if they have it) because charging opponents do not get their extra attack for charging against them.





My point was plague marines Seem tough, but in reality they're no better than a CSM.

Really? They pretty much shrug off basic attacks, as they have an effective T5 and then get both their 3+ save and a FnP roll, AND they can take away the extra attack from an enemy's charge.

They are only disadvantaged against power weapons and rending, and even then they still have T5 (S4 is only wounding them 1/3rd of the time).

All that for 8 points more (or usually 7 points more after Icon) than a basic CSM.

Now I love basic CSMs, they're great. But PMs are specialists in resilience against small arms fire and basic/low Strength attacks. And they are definitely more than 50% tougher vs. those (the price difference between a PM and CSM is roughly 50%).

In 1750 points you can fit nearly 30 PMs with 3 Rhinos, all with PF toting ACs and 2x plasmaguns for each squad (total 3 squads) AND still have points for 2 DPs and 6 Obliterators.

Looking at a plague marine in isolation, it looks easy to take them on, things get a bit trickier when you look at them as part of a larger whole.




and about cover? yea I understand theres supposed to be cover. The problem is that NO ONE - atleast around here - plays with enough terrain for cover saves to be part of the game.


That has nothing to do with PMs inherent rules, and has to do with where you're playing. ;)


I understand your point though, that they have weaknesses. Which is as it should be.

However, for the points, you get an extraordinary package

arachnid
25-01-2009, 17:34
@ op :

chaos is an excellent starting force, as resilient as any marine (or more), harder in cc as well.

Some units are a little heavy on points, some are a fair bit cheaper than the sm counterparts.

All in all, chaos is very flexible, with a load of fun stuff to use that doesnt mean auto-lose in any way.

Heck, even spawn has their uses with gift of chaos.


There's no point in comparing to the old codex, this one works just fine.

(although daemon princes and lash should have been 0-1 choices)