PDA

View Full Version : Who are the best and worst codex writer?



09philj
02-11-2013, 17:34
I was just curious to know who other people think writes the best and worst codexes, in terms of both the rules and fluff. I'd vote Phil Kelly as the best because his are so much more fun to read and the rules are more fun. Especially the Shokk Attack Gun.:chrome:

Scammel
02-11-2013, 17:44
Phil Kelly can produce some of the very best (Orks, Daemons) but also rather iffy (CSM, Space Wolves) books. With this inconsistency in mind, Vetock seems to come out on top, especially if his Fantasy work is taken into account.

Mortimer
02-11-2013, 17:46
I vote Matticus Warde to be the best and worst.

Worst because what he writes is dog awful and over powered, he is also best for it.. he sets the template of what is to come.. and how to improve on bad mistakes.

Dragon11
02-11-2013, 17:54
Best is between kelly and vetock - did anyone notice how eldar seemed a lot more powerful then all kellys other dexs?
Worst is ward or cruddace - crudace underpowers, ward overpowers

Scammel
02-11-2013, 17:55
I think it should be pointed out for the purposes of this thread that Ward has not written any rules for the past two years, according to the man himself.

A.T.
02-11-2013, 18:04
Cruddace.

You can see in things like the cron dex that Ward is actually thinking about what he's doing. His intentions are wrong but he's clearly capable of the job if given proper oversight.

Cruddace on the other hand just doesn't seem to get it.

Soldado
02-11-2013, 18:05
Best: Chambers, Haines & Johnson
Worst: Ward, Cruddace & Thorpe

Not in any particular order.

Chem-Dog
02-11-2013, 18:08
I think it's actually really hard to grade the writers because each Codex is written at a different point in time with a different line of armies to compete against and, I dare say, a different set of imperatives from the moneybrain of GW.

That said, I feel more inclined to trust Vettock, he's an age-old established name in the hobby and, to me, this means he's playing with values similar to mine, fun and character.

Belakor
02-11-2013, 18:23
I think it should be pointed out for the purposes of this thread that Ward has not written any rules for the past two years, according to the man himself.

Agreed, because I saw in a video from GW HQ it was a hooded man with a electricuting pole...

Scammel
02-11-2013, 18:31
Agreed, because I saw in a video from GW HQ it was a hooded man with a electricuting pole...

*Sobs* 'But it's so overpowered!'

Bubble Ghost
02-11-2013, 18:40
I think it's actually really hard to grade the writers because each Codex is written at a different point in time with a different line of armies to compete against and, I dare say, a different set of imperatives from the moneybrain of GW.

Oh, stop being so sensible.

-Totenkopf-
02-11-2013, 18:40
I have to say Cruddace is the worst..By far the worst, as was said earlier, he just doesn't get it..

For the best, I vote Tuomas Pirinen when he was around, but now, my vote goes to Phil Kelly..

-Totenkopf-
02-11-2013, 18:43
I think it's actually really hard to grade the writers because each Codex is written at a different point in time with a different line of armies to compete against and, I dare say, a different set of imperatives from the moneybrain of GW.

That said, I feel more inclined to trust Vettock, he's an age-old established name in the hobby and, to me, this means he's playing with values similar to mine, fun and character.

And while some of this is true, there is something to be said for consistency and the fact that some writers just get it and some really don't. This goes above and beyond any set of imperatives of GW..

Ironbone
02-11-2013, 18:58
Best ? Overall Phil Kelly, thanks to some realy good codexes (WH, DH, DE ) even if he fall flat seriously several times ( chaos 3.5, SW, Eldars ). Robin Cruddance wrote preety bad nids and terrible WD SoB, but on the other hand also made excelent codex for IG.

Worst ? Matt (awk)Ward, absouletly no deny. SM were not so bad, but BA, GK, and newcorns, just ugh....

duffybear1988
02-11-2013, 19:04
Cruddace is by far the worst writer ever. He wrote the IG book and everything after was downhill.

OuroborosTriumphant
02-11-2013, 19:10
Kelly writes good fluff and rules which are on average well-balanced, but with some outliers both in the too-good and not-good enough directions. Vetock writes good fluff and probably the best rules for internal balance. Matt Ward writes bad fluff and while the internal balance seems to be pretty good, his codexes tend towards the overpowered (this is less obvious when comparing his older codexes due to a general trend of codex-creep). Cruddace writes decent fluff if you don't ask him to write Tyranids, but his balance is god-awful, with vastly too powerful and almost pointless units side-by-side in his codexes.

So Vetock is probably the best and worst is Cruddace or Ward depending on if you care more about good rules or good fluff.

Spiney Norman
02-11-2013, 19:22
Best: Kelly or Vetock, to my knowledge Jeremy Vetockis quite new at the whole codex writing game, but Dark Angels was pretty damn good (as was Lizardmen) both books had good internal balance and didn't break the meta. Kelly's record is somewhat chequered, he authored what I still consider to be one of the best all-round books still in use (Dark Eldar), but he also wrote space wolves, which was a mini-earthquake in the meta-game when it came out, and not for the right reasons. Eldar was a fair effort, but the internal balance is a little off.

Worst is probably Robin Cruddace, he had a fairly good start with Imperial Guard, but that seems to have been something of a fluke and everything he has touched since then has turned to, well crud. What he has done to the sisters of battle (not once but twice) is pretty unforgivable, and he made a total mess of the last Tyranid book, and the Tomb King fantasy book as well.

Mat Ward is certainly a strong contender for the worst category, certainly fluff offerings are the worst of any codex author, but I think his overpowering tendencies a mainly down to his entusiasm for the game and that he actually has a lot of ability (he did a good job with the 8th edition fantasy core rule book for example) compared to Cruddace who just comes across as completely clueless.

OuroborosTriumphant
02-11-2013, 19:53
Worst is probably Robin Cruddace, he had a fairly good start with Imperial Guard, but that seems to have been something of a fluke

In fairness, even in IG, there are units that are awesomely good (Veterans, Vendettas, all the stuff we're all bored of see) and units that are flatly dire (Ogryns, Rough Riders, Stormtroopers). It's just that the too-good units are strong enough to carry the list, but the balance is darts-thrown-blindfold-at-a-board pointswise.

Mozzamanx
02-11-2013, 20:41
Cruddace seems to suffer from a complete ignorance of internal balance, along with an inability to make abilities 'work'. I have yet to see a single Codex or Army Book where I would consider the internal balance to be even partially successful. Whether it is the Vendetta and Manticore against anything else, the Tervigon and Hive Guard, or Demigryph Knights and Casket in Fantasy. He also displays some ability to produce good concepts or ideas, but the implementation falls flat on its face. On a smaller scale, the imbalance seems especially out of line when considering new units produced by himself. I think 'Nids are the worst example of this by far, but it can be seen in all of his books.

On the other side, Vetock seems fairly capable so far. He produces fun and fluffy rules which actually function correctly on the battlefield. All of his books display good to excellent internal balance by GW standards, while outwardly they tend to be on the upper scale but not broken. Tau is the obvious outlier here with the Riptide being a horrible offender, while the Skaven seem to be powerful as a result of the core rules shift, rather than the edition they were written under.

corps
02-11-2013, 20:46
Worst Ward and Cruddace without doubt. Best chambers, pete haines. kelly would be in the middle. The combination of bad rules from Ward and bad codex Cruddace is why i dislike the curent fantasy and 40k most of the time. It s a bad combination of internal and external balance.

Spiney Norman
02-11-2013, 21:33
Hmmm, I was restricting myself to active codex writers, Andy Chambers would clearly top the pile if we're considering past contributors as well.

Bloodknight
02-11-2013, 21:49
he had a fairly good start with Imperial Guard, but that seems to have been something of a fluke

That is a terrible book, tbh. Sure, it's powerful, but the internal balance is among the worst of all codices.

Ironbone
02-11-2013, 22:43
Sure, it's powerful, but the internal balance is among the worst of all codices
I don't feel so. It's not monolist codex like CSM, or one where certain model/unit/wargear will pop up 99% of time. I actually tried and enjoyed a lot diffrent builds in current guard, and it's not that powerfull now either.

corps
03-11-2013, 00:01
Being a IG players before a Vanilla Marines or a SOB, i think the the Crudace IG codex follow the same weakness than before.
The elites is useless and a lot of fast choices too. Especially in conjonction with Ward rules.
The one codex before this one only vets were played because what the stormtrooper could do the vets could it better.
Now that the vets are troops you don't even looks at elites.
And of course ogryns... wo will playing a ogryns unit that cost the same as termies for no results.
So as not to change subject anyfurther, yes the Crudacce IG has balance issues but is not overpowered.
The problem is that for one armybook or codexe that mister C wrote correctly lke the IG and the vanilla, how many were horrible?

Does any one can give the precise number of codex and army books, he wrote between IG and vanilla? Tht will be a good start to have stats about him.

Randomman
03-11-2013, 09:13
Cruddance missed an opportunity to bring so much of the SM dex into line for the next five years. He copy and pasted most of the old dex and lowered the points of units that looked woefully inadequate, but missed out on all the units that were inherently weaker than they were five years ago. Things like tactical terminators, Venerable Dreadnaughts, assault marines, land raiders. He had an opportunity to write new rules but they got copied and pasted and that was that. About as innovative as taking a dump.

I aware that chapter tactics has been a great addition and has improved SM but a) where did that idea stem from? (Clue, rhymes with Patt Ford) And b) does 7 independent rules make a codex?

Mandragola
03-11-2013, 10:46
7 independent rules could make a codex. Sort of remains to be seen.

Writing a marine codex is awkward because you actually have so little freedom. I have my own theory on the problem with marines, which is that it's down to some of their key wargear being fundamentally weak, but impossible to change because it's the same across the whole game.

Key of these is the bolt gun. Bolt guns simply do not do enough harm any more. In an environment of FMCs, wave serpents, riptides and so on a tactical marine armed with a bolt gun is a chump. All too often he has no means of doing any harm whatsoever. Even when he does come up against enemy infantry, nearly everyone now has a better gun! So now eldar are all rending, DE poisoned, necrons gauss, tau hard-hitting as always. On the other end of the scale you've got IG and orks with massive weight of fire. Tactical marines end up losing firefights with everyone, and it just should not be that way.

Trouble is, a codex writer can't change it. Personally, to make tactical marines a choice you'd actually choose to have, I'd look at making bolt guns something like rending+shred. And yes, I do understand how massive a change that would be. I want to see bolt guns taking down big beasts under a hail of fire, and slaughtering lesser troops, not harmlessly pattering off big stuff or killing 1 kroot in a forest from a 5 man squad.

Very hard to say who is the best writer because the criteria vary so much. However, I think the current CSM book takes Kelly way out of the running. I seriously think it's the worst codex currently in circulation, for the game as a whole. I don't know of any other book with worse internal and external balance. It's been out a while now but still every time I see baledrakes it reminds me just how broken they are. I'm astonished they made it into print. But then the rest of the book is so much dross, so many units that simply do not work on the field of play, that they drag down the army's overall performance to a point that it isn't competitive.

The eldar book isn't as bad, but wave serpents are also a clear mistake, with firepower and durability both way, way off what they should be for a dedicated transport at its point value.

Coming back to marines though, I don't really know what the C:SM writer was supposed to do. He can't just drop marines to 10 points each. He can't give rhinos front armour 13 or make bolt guns do damage. In the circumstances he's turned out a herohammer army that can more or less manage in the meta, but only by not taking actual space marines in any great number (replacing them with bikes or having some small scoring units walk on late from reserve) because they have been superseded by codex creep.

Dkoz
03-11-2013, 11:40
I like Matt Wards work I hope he writes my new Blood Angles and Necrons codex.

A.T.
03-11-2013, 14:02
I don't know of any other book with worse internal and external balance.Necrons, Sisters, Daemons, Guard, Nids, GK.


He can't give rhinos front armour 13:p
http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/r/RepressorFAQversion1P.pdf

But yes, Kelly was limited by the need to follow up the 4th ed book which already had a full range of units, without the freedom granted by the under-represented crons, DE, GK, or sisters. Loyalists were much the same being an incremental change rather than reimagining.

In terms of Cruddace and Guard, it's just a matter of quantity. There are plenty of poorly thought out options but there are so many options that it covers it up somewhat.

Ironbone
03-11-2013, 14:08
Key of these is the bolt gun. Bolt guns simply do not do enough harm any more. In an environment of FMCs, wave serpents, riptides and so on a tactical marine armed with a bolt gun is a chump
:wtf:. No way, how 3rd best basic gun in game can be bad ?


I'm astonished they made it into print
As well as psycho/rad granades, vechicle psybolts, vendetta, MSS, 2+ inv with re-roll of 1's, farsight bomb, old holofields, and tons of other stuff. Sad but true, lack of proper playtests before codex realese will surface time and time again.

A.T.
03-11-2013, 14:32
:wtf:. No way, how 3rd best basic gun in game can be bad ?Why the 3rd best, out of curiosity? The alternatives are :

GK-Stormbolter - assault 2 bolter
Orks-Shoota - assault 2, reduced range
Eldar-Shuriken catapult - assault 2, half range, rending
IG-Lasgun - reduced strength, first rank fire, second rank fire
Tau-Pulse Rifle - increased strength, increased range
DE-Splinter Rifle - poisoned
Crons-Gauss Flayer - gauss
Nids-Fleshborer - assault 1, half range.

MagicHat
03-11-2013, 14:53
They all have their flaws and strengths IMO. Haven't been a single book were I though "Yes, this is perfect".

I like Ward. I think his codicies are flavourful and varied, and you could use multiple builds without shooting yourself in the foot. And on the other side were some poor fluff and some OP pieces. Codex creep too.

Vetock is similar but holy FAQ he misses things. I like his fluff and I think Tau is one of the best internally balanced codicies right now.

Kelly is... SW. Monobuild amongst monobuild, excepting sisters of battle.
The Ork codex is great, as is the DE, but there are just to many misses in the Chaos codex. Not sure what to think about Eldar yet.

Cruddace is my least favorite one. SM was good all things considered, but IG, Tyranids and AS was just not.

Regarding Chaos Deamons, I am under impression that Kelly and Cruaddace wrote the codex and Ward (or vetock, or both?) wrote the armybook, so no single writer can be blamed/praised for it.

Bartali
04-11-2013, 08:45
7 independent rules could make a codex. Sort of remains to be seen.

Writing a marine codex is awkward because you actually have so little freedom. I have my own theory on the problem with marines, which is that it's down to some of their key wargear being fundamentally weak, but impossible to change because it's the same across the whole game.

Key of these is the bolt gun. Bolt guns simply do not do enough harm any more. In an environment of FMCs, wave serpents, riptides and so on a tactical marine armed with a bolt gun is a chump. All too often he has no means of doing any harm whatsoever. Even when he does come up against enemy infantry, nearly everyone now has a better gun! So now eldar are all rending, DE poisoned, necrons gauss, tau hard-hitting as always. On the other end of the scale you've got IG and orks with massive weight of fire. Tactical marines end up losing firefights with everyone, and it just should not be that way.

Trouble is, a codex writer can't change it. Personally, to make tactical marines a choice you'd actually choose to have, I'd look at making bolt guns something like rending+shred. And yes, I do understand how massive a change that would be. I want to see bolt guns taking down big beasts under a hail of fire, and slaughtering lesser troops, not harmlessly pattering off big stuff or killing 1 kroot in a forest from a 5 man squad.

Very hard to say who is the best writer because the criteria vary so much. However, I think the current CSM book takes Kelly way out of the running. I seriously think it's the worst codex currently in circulation, for the game as a whole. I don't know of any other book with worse internal and external balance. It's been out a while now but still every time I see baledrakes it reminds me just how broken they are. I'm astonished they made it into print. But then the rest of the book is so much dross, so many units that simply do not work on the field of play, that they drag down the army's overall performance to a point that it isn't competitive.

The eldar book isn't as bad, but wave serpents are also a clear mistake, with firepower and durability both way, way off what they should be for a dedicated transport at its point value.

Coming back to marines though, I don't really know what the C:SM writer was supposed to do. He can't just drop marines to 10 points each. He can't give rhinos front armour 13 or make bolt guns do damage. In the circumstances he's turned out a herohammer army that can more or less manage in the meta, but only by not taking actual space marines in any great number (replacing them with bikes or having some small scoring units walk on late from reserve) because they have been superseded by codex creep.

I agree with pretty much all of this. Marines needed a revolution to fit into sixth, but it didn't happen.

All of the current 6th ed writers are awful
Kelly - Heldrake, Wave Serpent, 2++ Re-rollable; bad internal balance in CSM and Eldar codexes
Vetcock - Buff Commander; Lacklustre DA codex
Cruddace - Lacklustre SM codex, 2++ Re-rollable

Kelly wins the worst of the worst prize.

Gropius
04-11-2013, 10:26
I think Ward has become a much better background writer since Grey Knights and Necrons. As far as i know he wrote the Iiyanden and Imperial Fist supplements and while I haven't read the IF book yet, I haven't heard anything bad about it, and the Eldar supplement background was pretty good in my opinion.

Poseidal
04-11-2013, 10:57
I agree with pretty much all of this. Marines needed a revolution to fit into sixth, but it didn't happen.

All of the current 6th ed writers are awful
Kelly - Heldrake, Wave Serpent, 2++ Re-rollable; bad internal balance in CSM and Eldar codexes
Vetcock - Buff Commander; Lacklustre DA codex
Cruddace - Lacklustre SM codex, 2++ Re-rollable

Kelly wins the worst of the worst prize.

The Eldar codex has exceptionally good internal balance. The only 'overtuned' unit is the Wave Serpent, and the only real 'bad' unit is Howling Banshees and Harlequins (both of whom aren't totally awful). Everything else is *good* within arms reach of each other, and you have very real choices choosing between them in all slots.

It is probably the most internally balanced codex 40k has ever seen.

Ironbone
04-11-2013, 11:59
Why the 3rd best, out of curiosity?
Ok, 4th, i forget about storm bolters :p. And why bolter is so good ? Simply, because is a gun with decent range, Strenght, and number of shots. None of these traits is partculary awesome, but all of them combined make a realy good gun. Yes, humble boltgun is beaten by flayer, pulse rifle and it's storm variant, but overall is still weapon that can engage a lot of targets, infantry, monsters, and even light vechicles and bring them down.

Bartali
04-11-2013, 12:15
The Eldar codex has exceptionally good internal balance. The only 'overtuned' unit is the Wave Serpent, and the only real 'bad' unit is Howling Banshees and Harlequins (both of whom aren't totally awful). Everything else is *good* within arms reach of each other, and you have very real choices choosing between them in all slots.

It is probably the most internally balanced codex 40k has ever seen.

Will have to agree to disagree there. I know Kelly is the poster boy for the FAAC players, but he can't do internal balance and/or can't help himself on certain units.

Poseidal
04-11-2013, 12:31
Are you sure you're not mistaking one of the other codices or authors ? Eldar have one 'overtuned' unit and one or two 'bad' units but everything else in Eldar is competitive with everything else in the same codex, within a stones throw.

Inquisitor Shego
04-11-2013, 12:35
Sorry to be dumb, but which army has a 2++ rerollable? Daemons + Tzeentch + Grimoire + Divination? And secondly, what does FAAC stand for?

Warsmith Tharak
04-11-2013, 12:56
FAAC = fluff at all cost? Fun at all cost? I have no idea.

Worst Codex writer? Kelly. He can not be forgiven for the Chaos dex... I did not think it was possible to Write a dex worse than the 4.ed one, but I was wrong.
My biggest hope is that now it is as bad as it gets:-)

A.T.
04-11-2013, 13:10
My biggest hope is that now it is as bad as it gets:-)No, you could still get Cruddace for the next one...

Bartali
04-11-2013, 13:14
Sorry to be dumb, but which army has a 2++ rerollable? Daemons + Tzeentch + Grimoire + Divination? And secondly, what does FAAC stand for?

Yes, Daemons screamer star. FAAC=Fluff at all costs

Warsmith Tharak
04-11-2013, 13:18
No, you could still get Cruddace for the next one...

Yhea, that would suck.
Imagin that the legions would get a small nod, With some small special rules depending if you play Iron Warriors or Night Lords.
Getting a rather balanced dex without helldrakes and mace princes.

Wait a minute, is not that what alot of People have been chanting since the Death of the 3.5?
Bring it on, Cruddace:-)

TheDungen
04-11-2013, 14:50
Codices arent one man shows, everyone makes good and bad ones.

Ward is too radical he has a lot of ideas for fluff and rules and he puts them all in there.

Kelly is to conservative he doesnt do anythign new in either fluff or rules butdelivers kind of what you would expect.

As for the balance of Ward's codices they are perfectly (ok maybe not perfectly but fairly) balanced towards other ward codices. It's when they come into contact with oth codices that there's trouble.

Over all best writer, Toumas Pirinen. Not sure if he ever write anything for 40k though

Warsmith Tharak
04-11-2013, 15:01
Codices arent one ma shows, everyone makes good and bad ones. Over all I'd say mat(t?) ward codices has the best rules and the worst fluff.

I think you are absolutly right. But since Black Library, Forge World and my own head can give me fluff, but I need the rules to be fun and balanced to play pick up matches, I would say Mat is the better Codex writer.

Ironbone
04-11-2013, 15:22
best rules and the worst fluff.
Best rules ? For army, maybe, but definietly not for game as whole :eyebrows:. I won't feel good, if i have to listen all the rant about army beeing broken ( and 3/4 Matt Ward made armies in 5th ed deserved that rant very well ).


Codices arent one man shows
Of coures they are not, neither many other books, however, author is one person responsilbe for puting his and others work togeter, so he's one most responsible for codex as whole. He, and he alone can overall be lauded ( or blamed ) for every single word in codex, as he signed such book by his name, as mark for responsibility for all that on the pages.

TheDungen
04-11-2013, 15:27
since I've edited the post above i guess I should respond to what you said about it.

Ward isn't the kind of rules writer who writes rules to be balanced he writes rules to be new and fun to play with. Wouldn't it be awesome if they could do this? wouldn't it be awesome i we did this? same thing with his fluff, wouldn't it be awesome if this character did this?

He needs someone to tell him when he's gone to far but he writes very interesting rules if you ignore the balance issues.

If I write codices I'd probably be a ward. I'd redo the fluff to what i felt it should be, based on this I'd come up with some cool rules based on a unique mechanic for the army and at the end I'd because of this not have enough time to properly playtest it.

Ward at least has vision which is more than I can say about some of the other writers.

corps
04-11-2013, 15:43
Kelly is... SW. Monobuild amongst monobuild, excepting sisters of battle.

I don't understand that one. It s Cruddace that has been in charge twice of the SOB not Kelly. Or do you mean that Cruddace's SOB are even more monobuild?

Charistoph
04-11-2013, 16:21
I think it should be pointed out for the purposes of this thread that Ward has not written any rules for the past two years, according to the man himself.

Interesting, since he was a lead writer on the edition... But as for codices, he hasn't been a lead since Necrons.

My least favorite is Cruddace. His rules writing is so schizophrenic. Often creating Mono-builds even worse than Kelly can be accused because nothing but the units in that build is actually useful for its cost. He lost (or was forced to lose) several prime opportunities when bringing in the Templars, but C:SM is much better than the results from C:IG and C:T. He may finally be getting it.

Vettock did well with Tau Empire. Like Cruddace, I think he missed some opportunities (or was forced to miss them), but they aren't as bad or glaring as Cruddace's work, while making the Tau book quite cohesive.

Kelly used to be my favorite, largely because of how C:SW was constructed. As some have mentioned, there's usually one shining unit in the codices he's lead for. He writes the fluff real well, and doesn't take too many adventures from the previous codex. If he went off of C:CSM 3.5 to write the current book, it would have been much different. And before anyone else brings up the BaleDrake, he didn't write the FAQ.

williamhm
04-11-2013, 17:47
The Eldar codex has exceptionally good internal balance. The only 'overtuned' unit is the Wave Serpent, and the only real 'bad' unit is Howling Banshees and Harlequins (both of whom aren't totally awful). Everything else is *good* within arms reach of each other, and you have very real choices choosing between them in all slots.

It is probably the most internally balanced codex 40k has ever seen.

I'd actually agree with this the number of options in Eldar is one reason I'm thinking of playing them now that i have money to get back into the game. Just the troop choices alone are all very good without being over priced and do different things. Do wish Banshees were better or that they had an assault transport for them..

Vaktathi
04-11-2013, 18:57
At this point, I'm not sure there's a "best" or "worst" really, each have their own flaws.

Kelly tends to take the previous book and do "more of the same, even moreso". We can see this especially in the CSM and Eldar books. C:CSM suffers many of the same issues the old book did while adding more duplicate capabilities for stuff the army could already do but not really enhancing or adapting them. Codex: Eldar brought us right back to 4E with invinci-skimmerspam (just with Wave Serpents now instead of Falcons) and further reinforces the need for psyker HQ's.

Ward tends to make books that read like fandex's. The writing style is over the top and the new stuff often accompanies the writing in the same vein.

Cruddace manages to keep the fluff in his works somewhat level headed but has some awful internal balance.

Vettock thus far has managed some pretty ok stuff, I guess he may be the "best" at the moment.

MagicHat
04-11-2013, 23:12
I don't understand that one. It s Cruddace that has been in charge twice of the SOB not Kelly. Or do you mean that Cruddace's SOB are even more monobuild?

Exactly.

SoB is monobuild by complete lack of choice.
SW actually had options written in, but the internal balance was so disastrous that rune priests, grey hunters and long fangs was pretty much the only thing seen.

Freman Bloodglaive
05-11-2013, 00:14
Vettock is, I think, the best rules writer.

Ward can be good, but his codexes can end up as unpleasant to play against. His fluff used to be very bad.

Cruddace is inconsistent. His rules are generally okay but not particularly exciting, and there is usually one particular build that is clearly better than any other.

Kelly is like Cruddace, except his armies are usually better.

The cure for the boltgun armed marine may be to modernize the second edition rapid fire rules (specific to marines). In Marine hands the bolter becomes an assault 2 weapon. Storm bolters could become assault 3 (again for marines).

Spiney Norman
05-11-2013, 09:10
I think it should be pointed out for the purposes of this thread that Ward has not written any rules for the past two years, according to the man himself.

This is just concerning 40k yes? He was the lead author on Warhammer High elves and Dark Elves (and it is assumed; Wood elves, due next May), I somehow doubt those were completely finished two years before publication. Admittedly he did a pretty good job with Dark Elves, as far as I have seen so far the book is fun to play with and against and while there are some units that are inexplicably high cost for their abilities the internal balance isn't terrible, unlike High elves.

daveNYC
05-11-2013, 13:12
Don't want to go on with who is bestestest. Ward is pretty bad at fluff, and his Necron's have rules designed to let them ignore the downsides of some of 6th edition's rules, that said, he loves to give armies toys, and that's not bad. Kelly is in love with gimmick rules (Champions of Chaos and Warpstorm table are the DE Combat Drugs dialed up to stupid) and has serious issues writing close combat units (Mandrakes, Mutilators, Banshees), flip side is that if he likes the army he's writing for, he'll make it good and fun.

I'll just say that Gav Thorpe is bad and should feel bad. The 4E CSM book was horrible on pretty much every level.

Warsmith Tharak
05-11-2013, 13:28
Gav Thorpe was forced to follow the New and improved 'less-is-more' idea. And he appologiced for the 4.ed book, so he DO feel bad. And it was made With thoughts that they would make a Legion book...

Kelly on the other hand can only Write Eldar and Dark Eldar codexii.

daveNYC
05-11-2013, 14:04
Space Wolves weren't horribad. Sure they were basically better and cheaper Space Marines, and that is horrible design; but OTOH, they had options, interesting HQs, and the Sagas let you tweak your army. Kelly is definitely much better at doing pointy-eared xenos. I'm still, STILL, not quite able to wrap my head around the fact that the same guy who did Dark Eldar wrote the CSM book. Dark Eldar is still about the best book ever. Good fluff, good units (la la la la Mandrakes I can't hear you), and a design that let you run three different themed armies (Haemonculi, Wych, Kabal) with mech, foot, and webway delivery. And deep strike options on top of that.

Fear Ghoul
05-11-2013, 14:24
Vetock is far and away the best codex author currently, through sheer dint of not having had as many major screw ups as the others.

Warsmith Tharak
05-11-2013, 14:46
... And I think the Dark Eldar Codex is why I Lothe him: I know what he is capeble of but it feels like he did not care\bother to to his job and Write a Chaos marine dex to half of what he could have done.

And Codex Space Wolf have less than stellar internal (and at the time it came out, external). Good ideas but not to good a finished Product.

Both Cruddace and Ward feels like they learn and that they tries to make good codexes (and they are getting better in the week Points, rescetivly fluff for Ward and rules for Cruddace), but Kelly do not. If he likes the Codex you are in for a treat, but if not he will not bother.
And since he is the one I would the least to Write the next Codex, I vote him worst.

Does Vetock have any other codexii than Tau and Dark Angels?

Best... Andy Chambers.

A.T.
05-11-2013, 14:56
Both Cruddace and Ward feels like they learn and that they tries to make good codexes (and they are getting better in the week Points, rescetivly fluff for Ward and rules for Cruddace)Guard ---> Nids ---> Sisters ---> Sisters mk2?
Not improving.

(I don't count the SM dex as it was doubtless a collaborative affair)

daveNYC
05-11-2013, 15:44
Both Cruddace and Ward feels like they learn and that they tries to make good codexes (and they are getting better in the week Points, rescetivly fluff for Ward and rules for Cruddace), but Kelly do not. If he likes the Codex you are in for a treat, but if not he will not bother.
And since he is the one I would the least to Write the next Codex, I vote him worst.

...

Best... Andy Chambers.

The bit in bold is a serious problem, and I don't think it's just for Kelly, though the range of quality from him does make it painfully clear. Having a single author means that a codex is totally dependent on what that author's vision is and potentially what he had for breakfast that day. I don't want rules by committee per se, but a little more structure and additional input into the design would be nice. Compare and contrast the results of the more collaborative Star Wars IV-VI with Episodes I-III that had Lucas running the whole show.

corps
05-11-2013, 18:49
I ve been for a long time and still be for a commitee writting both for the rules and for the codex with one author giving overall controle but not absolute. As it has been pointed out the main problem of games workshop it s that it all depends on the whim of one man. you are lucky if it s a guy like Andy Chambers you cry when it s Ward. If a poll was created with all names of author for the worst and one for the best with only one choice. I m pretty sure that Cruddace and Ward will be on top for the worst.

A commitee will limit the worts for the rulling. And for the Fluff i think that it best to leave to author to avoid the Ward effect of having a meh fluff written in constant hyperbole.

DoctorTom
05-11-2013, 19:13
Kelly on the other hand can only Write Eldar and Dark Eldar codexii.

I thought he did a good job with the Ork Codex. Maybe just keep him away from the powered armor codexes.

Spiney Norman
05-11-2013, 23:39
I thought he did a good job with the Ork Codex. Maybe just keep him away from the powered armor codexes.

In fairness the only author that hasn't made a deplorable mess of a Power armour codex is JV right?

Warsmith Tharak
06-11-2013, 08:20
I thought he did a good job with the Ork Codex. Maybe just keep him away from the powered armor codexes.

Forgot about that one, a good Codex that suffered from two edition changes. And it had the right amount of random things that you could choose if you wantet to include or not, unlike the Daemon and Chaos dex who got to much that you are forced to have.


In fairness the only author that hasn't made a deplorable mess of a Power armour codex is JV right?

Not all will agree, but I put both Andy Chambers (2.ed chaos , 3.ed Daemonhunter, 3.ed Space wolf and the 3.5 chaos Space marine ) and Pete Haines (3.ed Witch hunter, 3.5 chaos Space marine and 4.ed Space marine) on that list.

I know the 3.5 is a mixed bag, but it both sucseded by letting you build all of the 9 Legion, and failed since With the myrade of options it became to powerfull.

Spiney Norman
06-11-2013, 08:49
Not all will agree, but I put both Andy Chambers (2.ed chaos , 3.ed Daemonhunter, 3.ed Space wolf and the 3.5 chaos Space marine ) and Pete Haines (3.ed Witch hunter, 3.5 chaos Space marine and 4.ed Space marine) on that list.


I was sort of confining myself to the authors that still do write codexes (Ward, Cruddace, Kelly, Vetock), and specifically in recent times, ward screwed up grey knits, Kelly made a mess of space wolves and CSM and Cruddace butchered battle sisters not once, but twice.

I've got to say I've played against chaos marines a fair bit with all of my armies and I don't really see what is wrong with them except for the helldrake (and lets be fair, even the best codexes have the odd off unit). Is it more that CSM players didn't like the unit concepts they were given? All the warp forge stuff seemed pretty cool from my perspective.

Freman Bloodglaive
06-11-2013, 09:45
Cool? I guess so.

The main complaint is that if you want to play an army that doesn't get stomped you have to play Codex:Nurgle plus dragons.

That and that for some reason your cult troops are all more dedicated to their god than the guy who leads them, or their elite terminators.

Fear Ghoul
06-11-2013, 10:58
Not all will agree, but I put both Andy Chambers (2.ed chaos , 3.ed Daemonhunter, 3.ed Space wolf and the 3.5 chaos Space marine ) and Pete Haines (3.ed Witch hunter, 3.5 chaos Space marine and 4.ed Space marine) on that list.

I know the 3.5 is a mixed bag, but it both sucseded by letting you build all of the 9 Legion, and failed since With the myrade of options it became to powerfull.

3.5 Chaos was the Grey Knights of its edition. By that fact alone both Andy Chambers and Pete Haines cannot be the best codex authors.

TheDungen
06-11-2013, 11:06
codexii.

pretty sure that the english plural form of Codex is codices.

If you're looking for the true latin it should be inflected according the the third declination and would thus be codes (not pronounced code-s but cod-es). Other such words are rex and lex.

the ii is used for second declination masculine plural word with has a nominative form ending with -us, such as servus or deus. and for second declination neutral genitive singular. words that end with -um, such as templum or studium.

Warsmith Tharak
06-11-2013, 11:21
I was sort of confining myself to the authors that still do write codexes (Ward, Cruddace, Kelly, Vetock), and specifically in recent times, ward screwed up grey knits, Kelly made a mess of space wolves and CSM and Cruddace butchered battle sisters not once, but twice.

I've got to say I've played against chaos marines a fair bit with all of my armies and I don't really see what is wrong with them except for the helldrake (and lets be fair, even the best codexes have the odd off unit). Is it more that CSM players didn't like the unit concepts they were given? All the warp forge stuff seemed pretty cool from my perspective.

There are to many internal problems. Things are ether to cheap or to expencive, the Warp forge stuff struggels by being AV 12 in 6.ed and are being priced from a 5.ed perspective (drake excluding). Alot of players are miffed for not getting Legions special rules (and then see Space marine get them), the Warp talons are way overpriced, mutilators look horribad, the must Challenge rule is dreadful, Chaos Lord are to weak, and the entire produkt feels rushed and poorly done.

That said I Do enjoy playing With it, it might be becouse I play With friends who use Things like Howling banshee, ogryns and sister of Battle With pentient engine. So I do have the luxory of having Close fought Battles With Things that other chaos players can not use if the want to have a chanse to win. Not that winning is that important to me, but it kind of sucks to Field an army just to remove models, With the outcome allready given.

Of the rules/fluff Writes still aktiv I think Vetock is the best, I like both of his dex'es and some small Balance issues aside the give of the right feel of the army they describe.

Edit: @ TheDungeon: Of all my writing errors, you picket that one:-), I will try to remember it:-D

TheDungen
06-11-2013, 11:43
It was not specifically aimed at you, I quoted you more as an example. I have seen a lot of creative spelling of that word on these boards.

Warsmith Tharak
06-11-2013, 12:51
It was not specifically aimed at you, I quoted you more as an example. I have seen a lot of creative spelling of that word on these boards.

I thought I had read it here on this board before. But I think you are right, even if you are a sweet Brother (swedish)


3.5 Chaos was the Grey Knights of its edition. By that fact alone both Andy Chambers and Pete Haines cannot be the best codex authors.

It was great, it was just the other codices(:-D) who was to week:-P.
It started the trend that became doctrines in imperial guard 3.5 and traits in Space Marine 4ed, unfortuntly it was to powerful and some poor layout ment it was difficult to find all the wargear.
But the fluff means that it can never be considered Grey Knights of its edition, couse that was good.

Ruination Drinker
07-11-2013, 06:35
Kelly on the other hand can only Write Eldar and Dark Eldar codexii.

QFT in case any Kelly fanboys missed this one.

edit:

But seriously, the Ork codex was good. A solid B grade for the effort. It had a lot of mainstay concepts like Nobs and Dreads as troops. Unfortunately, it was totally unprepared for codex creep and stunk up the house in the meta. Sure Nob bikers had their time in the sun in 5th, but there's also the specter of the Flash Gits hanging over Phil's head.

I seriously wished he had used a little bit of that mojo that he used when he wrote the SW dex.

Mandragola
07-11-2013, 07:31
Phil Kelly consistently puts units in his codexes that are way too good. Consider:

Nobz bikers
Grey hunters
Baledrakes
Wave serpents

And for each of these there are utterly useless units like flash glitz, blood claws, banshees or berzerkers. Units that aren't just "harder to use", but actually impossible to find a use for and/or outclassed at their own job by another option (blood claws).

If you see an army with all of a particular slot crammed with a single unit, spammed as many times as possible, odds on its a PK product.

Spiney Norman
07-11-2013, 07:41
Phil Kelly consistently pits units in his codexes that are wAy too good. Consider:

Nobz bikers
Grey hunters
Baledrakes
Wave serpents

If you see an army with all of a particular slot crammed with a single unit, spammed as many times as possible, odds on its a PK product.

I think you can probably add venoms to that list as well, venom spam seems to be the predominant DE list at the moment, though they are by no means as OP as serpents.

eldaran
07-11-2013, 08:03
I would like to say in Kelly's defence that he did write the chaos book at the beginning of 6th, and a lot of it does have a sense of 'not sure about the full impacts of the 6th edition changes' in it. That said, it has suffered for years (even 3.5) with T.Sons being crap, Berserkers taking hit after hit (especially as the editions have got more shooty) and I would put money that both Gav and Kelly were under a mandate to keep it toned down because of memories of 3.5.

I do believe personally that the chaos players are over-exaggerating about the problems with the 6th codexes, but there are things that do make me wonder what Phil was smoking (helldrakes and warp talons, to give both extremes) though the big issue with the drake was not so much Phil's fault as the FAQ...

Vaktathi
07-11-2013, 08:16
I would like to say in Kelly's defence that he did write the chaos book at the beginning of 6th, and a lot of it does have a sense of 'not sure about the full impacts of the 6th edition changes' in it. That said, it has suffered for years (even 3.5) with T.Sons being crap, Berserkers taking hit after hit (especially as the editions have got more shooty) and I would put money that both Gav and Kelly were under a mandate to keep it toned down because of memories of 3.5. Gav was largely operating under Alessio Cavatore, who was using the previous book as a new design paradigm template, which may have had some to do with the 3.5 book but there'd already been at least one design paradigm change again between the 3.5 book and the 4E book. Given the average length of time the typical player engages in 40k, less than 2 years, it'd be odd indeed if the 3.5 book was still a reason for Kelly's design, especially as we've had other books just as bad if not worse in terms of metagame balance than the 3.5 book before and after (some of Kelly's writing).

eldaran
07-11-2013, 09:47
Gav was largely operating under Alessio Cavatore, who was using the previous book as a new design paradigm template, which may have had some to do with the 3.5 book but there'd already been at least one design paradigm change again between the 3.5 book and the 4E book. Given the average length of time the typical player engages in 40k, less than 2 years, it'd be odd indeed if the 3.5 book was still a reason for Kelly's design, especially as we've had other books just as bad if not worse in terms of metagame balance than the 3.5 book before and after (some of Kelly's writing).

Given I still think the memory of 2nd Ed genestealers are impacting their rule design today... :angel: I'd disagree with the metagame balance of 3.5 compared to other books (nothing gives me nightmares like the old-style Iron Warriors list of cheddar that popped up everywhere and I don't think anything compares with that in the context of the edition it is in, even Eldar Harlequin flying circus - fourth really had a lot of those going, didn't it?), but I do agree that it would be odd if I am right, and do think that it was a missed opportunity to have not have legion tactics, especially since I never see anyone play chaos with anything other than the damn legions, anyway - I have never actually seen a Red Corsairs force in the flesh, now I think of it...

Mandragola
07-11-2013, 10:18
I think you can probably add venoms to that list as well, venom spam seems to be the predominant DE list at the moment, though they are by no means as OP as serpents.

Good point on venoms. DE armies tend to spam venoms and ravagers - and have no hope against wave serpent spam.

I do just find this sort of thing odd. As in, how can one guy design two books, one of which utterly trounces the other? How did he not think that through?

eldaran
07-11-2013, 10:21
That's more because venoms can't hurt vehicles, rather than anything else - and how does venom spam get trounced by serpent spam when those venoms tend to carry wyches with haywire grenades, which wreck serpents?

daveNYC
07-11-2013, 10:25
I don't think you can use the newness of the sixth edition as an excuse for the CSM rules, especially since Necrons have heaps of rules that seem designed to take advantage or mitigate the risks of the changes in 6th (Challenges -> MSS, Flying Transports -> Necrons aren't subject to crash damage, Vehicle HP and Snap Shots -> Gauss and Tesla). The Champions of Chaos rule has implications that would be obvious regardless of how long the sixth edition challenge rules had been in place. Removal of player agency being the most obvious. The issues with CC units is something that Kelly seems to have a problem with. Mutilators, Mandrakes, Banshees, and Warp Talons are all his. They range for meh (Mutilators), to WTF (Mandrakes). They all have interesting concepts, but as implemented, they all fall short of what they promise. Mandrakes and Warp Talons especially. You want to use them to pop-up and send a surprise stab-o-gram to someone, but as written, they won't really be getting the job done (or in the case of Warp Talons, the short blind range makes the DS risk not worth it, not to mention Black Sun Filters).

Basically the issues with the CSM codex were pretty obvious from the get-go, and as such, should be a black mark against Kelly. Also, he really should stick to doing shooty units, and call in some assistance whenever doing any unit or rule that involves close combat. If he'd asked anyone regarding Warp Talons, they'd have brought up the iffyness of Blind in general, the short range of their Blind rule ramping up the scatter risk without any sort of banner or homer, and the lack of assault grenades. Mandrakes would have brought similar comments regarding the fact that they're S3 AP- in CC and obtaining a shooting attack depends on killing a unit, and their stuck eating a round of shooting with minimal defenses.

I don't think Kelly is the worst, but right now it's pretty obvious where his strengths and weaknesses are, and it's up to GW to keep him doing what he's good at, and up to him to get help if he's doing work on something he's bad at.

Inquisitor Shego
07-11-2013, 10:31
I've heard a rumour that Kelly didn't write CSM, so much as inherit it from someone else, as this half finished mess. It might be an apologist's excuse, but I've seen it crop up two or three times. My general impression is simply that he's not a CSM fan. Which is fair enough. I would have NO CLUE how to write a Tau codex, for example, finding the army not to be my cup of tea.

eldaran
07-11-2013, 10:32
There are things in the new Eldar book that makes me think he forgot 6th ed rules changes, namely Acrobatic giving banshees an extra 3' on run, despite fleet not giving them the ability to charge after running any more...

Poseidal
07-11-2013, 10:40
There are things in the new Eldar book that makes me think he forgot 6th ed rules changes, namely Acrobatic giving banshees an extra 3' on run, despite fleet not giving them the ability to charge after running any more...

No, I think that was intended. It is consistent with what was given to Slaanesh Daemons.

While I would prefer +x" for both Run and Charge, I understand why it was done that way.

Mandragola
07-11-2013, 11:00
The tzeench chariot is a pretty clear example of a codex writer not understanding the rules!

Inquisitor Shego
07-11-2013, 12:21
I disagree. I think given the lack of an FAQ, the Tzeentch Chariot was a deliberate ploy to deny us a Helldrake on land. Thank God buying it gives Daemon players 2 Screamers and 1 Disc Herald. 4 kits buys you the Deathstar :p

Cheeslord
07-11-2013, 12:32
I don't know which is worse ... that Cruddace didn't understand how fast vehicles, passengers shooting and heavy weapons worked together, or that he thought it was reasonable balance to have a short ranged AV10 vehicle that can't move and fire?

The lack of FAQ might just mean that nobody at GW has really played daemons much since writing their codex (and have never seen the issue come up in a game they have watched because nobody else has ever fielded the chariot).

Mark.

Warsmith Tharak
07-11-2013, 12:47
Do not forget the flamer and 3 blue horrors:)

And the Author was Phil Kelly...

Brother Asmodeus
07-11-2013, 13:11
Matt Ward is worst (say it like Matt Damon in Team America and it all makes sense)...

Games Workshop ONLY true value is in its IP and anyone who can have Space Marines forming a fluff alliance with Necrons just has to top the list. Whatever happened to 'look not upon the alien, speak not unto the alien and listen not unto the alien'? But high-fiving with them and being buds is fine. Just awful.

Best were Rick Priestley, Andy Chambers and Jervis Johnson.

And much as all G-Dubya codices are in some way a team effort back in 2nd Ed they actaully were with credits stating such.

Cheeslord
07-11-2013, 13:40
Matt Ward is worst (say it like Matt Damon in Team America and it all makes sense)...



Glad its not just me who does that...

Mark.

corps
07-11-2013, 14:09
I heard too that kelly had have recieve the poison gift of finishing the Chaos book. If it true then, he has a excuse.

Sure Wave Serpents is a mistake. It s one big mistake on the munshkin side of mistake and the banshe are the down one. But that's the few one. The chaos book is worst true but again...

Don't forget that having a star or two in each book is the norme since the early begining of the game. Venom, wave serpent, helldrakes etc etc. We just too easily failed to remenber that is us players that spam them. We spam them to be competitive or just to avoide defeat. We spam them because the codexe we use allow it, because the rule allow it.

How can we not mention squadron? Squadron rules didn't existed until recently. So when you have your three leman russ you have your three heavy choice. Now this three leman russ can be taken as a single choice. it s a rule, it s in the codex, it alow spam.

Also autor work under a set of rule and / or a project director, so they have to deals with it. Be ready or not, be in the mood or not. If the rules/project director failed to ntice that the codex author don't get it, it is his responsability not the one of the author.

So what do we have now? We have Ward rules and a Cruddace Lead director, who for the both of them failed to see rules problem, internal balance/ external balance problem etc etc How can the two notorious for these flaws notice the flaws in other works? How can a Cruddace that butcher twice the SOB can understand that hellbrutes need transport to be effective in attack or that air strike missile are mandatry and a simple FAQ line to add them whill help. When himself don't give the penitent engine a transport or air strike missile to the SOB.

hey, the guy even copy paste, like the armor of faith rules in the SOB while it s only BLack Templar. How can copy/paste guy can notice anything wrong in other book as a lead project director. it s probably like hey Kelly nice work while having the attention spam of a gold fish.

Cruddace is even worse than that because as the lead project he should be the one too try to align previous codex and new one to the rules of ward. That means to align book in a shooting edition. He is the one who should work round the probleme of transport vehicule with a armor 10 that main function is to deliver assault troop .... who can't assault the same turn.

So when kelly wrote the book, he Cruddace should have said hey man i think there is a probleme the with the berzerker/mutilator/ insert what you want... Kelly has to work under both Ward and Cruddace, that doesn't excuse his mistakes but it s certainly explain some.

Last point for this post. i wonder how much the size of the army we use affect our appreciation of the author. For my self as i have said in other topics i mostly play under 1.000 points, usually 500. or 850 but mainly 750. and often in team of two player ( no allies in case of team) it means that i suffer less from spam of some units than other players. It also mean that each units has more impact on it s own than in larger game and the leagl requirement to make list assure a litlle more originality than in a 3.000 points army or even a 1.500 points.

Retrospectus
07-11-2013, 16:40
Games Workshop ONLY true value is in its IP and anyone who can have Space Marines forming a fluff alliance with Necrons just has to top the list. Whatever happened to 'look not upon the alien, speak not unto the alien and listen not unto the alien'? But high-fiving with them and being buds is fine. Just awful.


The blood angels were hardly "high-fiving" the necrons. they were fighting each other. the nids came down and were a bigger threat so they fought those instead. it was never said that they actually fought "together" just they were fighting the same enemy. after that both parties decided it wasn't worth continuing the fight with each other and left. hardly "best buds"

though allowing them to ally on the ally-matrix was pretty stupid

daveNYC
07-11-2013, 17:44
At the time of writing, the Necrons were only known as omnicidal death-bots. None of this newfangled personality and dynasty stuff. There was zero reason for them to ever ally with anyone, and even less reason for them not to slaughter the crap out of anyone that they did team up with. At the time, the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the team up made sense.

With the fluff change in the fifth edition codex, that alliance at least makes sense. People might not like it, but it's no longer an insane WTF moment.

Ruination Drinker
07-11-2013, 18:52
At the time of writing, the Necrons were only known as omnicidal death-bots. None of this newfangled personality and dynasty stuff. There was zero reason for them to ever ally with anyone, and even less reason for them not to slaughter the crap out of anyone that they did team up with. At the time, the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the team up made sense.

With the fluff change in the fifth edition codex, that alliance at least makes sense. People might not like it, but it's no longer an insane WTF moment.

Yes, all thanks to Matt Ward. The worst fluff and codex writer of all time. Thanks for giving the crons a new squishy side, while buffing them beyond OP. What an @ss. :rolleyes:

Sophet Drahas
01-12-2013, 09:09
So now I'm curious. Do we know who's writing the new Tyranid codex? I read somewhere that it's Ward. I mean, at least it's not Cruddace, but I want a codex that is balanced and has several playable lists and not one overpowered list that everyone brings to the table all the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

Sophet Drahas
01-12-2013, 09:31
So now I'm curious. Do we know who's writing the new Tyranid codex? I read somewhere that it's Ward. I mean, at least it's not Cruddace, but I want a codex that is balanced and has several playable lists and not one overpowered list that everyone brings to the table all the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

OuroborosTriumphant
01-12-2013, 11:46
So now I'm curious. Do we know who's writing the new Tyranid codex? I read somewhere that it's Ward. I mean, at least it's not Cruddace, but I want a codex that is balanced and has several playable lists and not one overpowered list that everyone brings to the table all the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

Be fair; Ward's codexes tend to be fairly well internally balanced; the overall power level tends a little high, but options in the book tend to balance pretty well against each other.

Sophet Drahas
01-12-2013, 16:55
Yes, all thanks to Matt Ward. The worst fluff and codex writer of all time. Thanks for giving the crons a new squishy side, while buffing them beyond OP. What an @ss. :rolleyes:

I think calling the dude an @ss is a bit harsh but I do agree that he ruined 'crons for me. I liked what they were before him and since I already play Tomb Kings, I have no desire to really start a Necron army now.

On a side note, I felt the Tomb Kings book was a mess and their fluff and gameplay was diminished. My all chariot list led by Settra himself is no longer possible since he is not a Liche Priest anymore.

And I think Cruddace may have just fell back on TK when doing Crons which is just lazy to me. There's no reason he couldn't have made them more sci-fi rather than fantasy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

gwarsh41
01-12-2013, 17:29
There are things in the new Eldar book that makes me think he forgot 6th ed rules changes, namely Acrobatic giving banshees an extra 3' on run, despite fleet not giving them the ability to charge after running any more...

Slaanesh daemons have it too. It is awesome to help get from point A to point B though!That is a 4-9 run that you get to re-roll.

Kelly gets my vote. Thus far he has written my favorite books. SW and Daemons.

DeathGlam
01-12-2013, 23:05
As a fluff player who plays in a group of bring your favourite models for a laugh type of group.

Best = Ward as he brings enthusiasm for new idea's and expanding the universe, even if it sometimes a little to extreme and Kelly for two of my favourite books, DE (which i play) and Space Wolves which i have been tempted by ever since they appeared with units like Lone Wolves and the Saga rules.

Worst = Ward as even i can't forgive him for what he turned the GK fluff into and for the decision to make the GK Chamber Militant to the entire inquistion via rules(he is probably not to blame for this though) and then Kelly for 2 reasons, not making the Chaos Marines codex as awesome as it should of been and for not giving me the option to run an all or mostly all Reaver Jetbike army (i love those models so much)

Spiney Norman
01-12-2013, 23:51
I think it should be pointed out for the purposes of this thread that Ward has not written any rules for the past two years, according to the man himself.

Which is an interesting statement for him to make since he wrote the rules in two out of the last three fantasy books to hit the shelves, including the very latest one, and heavily hinted that he has also written the wood elf book which is rumoured for may.

Still I guess saying that armies books probably have a 2 year lead in time isn't outside of the realms of possibility, that probably means we won't see any more books by him for the next two years.

I don't bear Mat as much ill will as a lot of others he actually hs a lot of enthusiasm for what he does and he certainly has done some really good things for this hobby (War of the rings, 8th ed fantasy, wfb dark elves) as well as some absolute clangers (grey knights, 7th ed fantasy daemons).

I think Jeremy Vetock is one of the best currently, his work on dark angels and Lizardmen has cemented him as my favourite rules writer among those still authoring books, both are well balanced and interesting.

Phil Kelly has a tendency to blow hot and cold, dark Eldar were an awesome feat of genius, while the more recent Eldar codex was an overpowered monstrosity, and space wolves was a bit of a disaster too. He also wrote the rules for Dreadfleet if memory serves, and the less said about that the better.

At the bottom of the pile we find Robin Cruddace, who try as he might just doesn't seem to have the slightest clue about how the games work, let alone how many points a given unit/ability should be worth. His work at disfiguring my beloved tomb king army was only surpassed by his double butchery of my sisters of battle.

Litcheur
02-12-2013, 22:19
Best : JJ and Chambers. :D

Worst : Kelly's a serious contender, with his infamous Chaos codex. But Matt and Crudace are arguably worse. :o

gwarsh41
03-12-2013, 03:00
So the consensus is that everyone loves and hates Phil Kelly?

Charistoph
03-12-2013, 03:44
Kelly is interesting. Great fluff writer, but rather unimaginative when it comes to redoing non-Eldar units, but does well with newer ones.

corps
03-12-2013, 13:50
Just finished the Dark Elves. It didn't change my opinion. Matt Ward fluff is tasteless. No flavor at all. On one hand some new units and som rules well build on the other hand , the pricing of units is still maddening. The lords and heroes prices choices, when you don't take special characters are too cheap. Same for the base units their shooter cost 12 points with all their special rues; their stats, their equipement and the fact that they can move and shoot. compare to crossbomen of the empire who just have a base weapon no armour and can only shoot or move for 9 points.

Their only one fact here, one of those units is not costly enought or too costly. Globally that's one of my main disapointement with Ward. Him and Cruddace are in the same boat as Cruddace is the lead director they are reponsible for the pricing of units, the balance both external and internal.

Another example the assault termies thei sergeant have no option, they can be equipped with pair of lightning claw witch regarding the change in power weapon are lame in this ed or with a shield and and a thunder armor. But when Ward at that time made the swaping weapon free Cruddace made them costing 5 points. Why?

Kelly, Vestock may made mistake but some of their mistake are due to the responsabilty of Ward and Cruddace. For eitheir the Autor create something not in tune with the current rules or for Ward and Cruddace failing to notice that mistake.

They both atracts more critics because they are more than just codex or army book author.

Now if a book is written two years before it s relase it means that A) despite that new books written by Ward are still comming despite he don't write anymore (if this is true). B) That any improvement that came latter in is writting is still subject to a two years delay.

This is why, i m in favor that both fantasy and 40 k last longer than the previous ed despite my feelings towards them, to have time to change the whay they work. Because i want a team of fluff writter, a team of rules wirtter, a team of codex and army writter. and all directed by a team. I don't want anymore a coin flip between a genius work and a mad work.

I don't care if it takes three more years than usual but i want army and codex writen by the same group of person for all books. No more arms race, where the last book as cheaper units that do more. No more tomb kings absurdity, no more korne berzeker spending their time smelling flower because they can't charge on the turn they get off their of their rhino...

I want team work when someone say, hey guys stuff is good and it s coherent with the core rules but dont you think that the price is to low compare to that unit from that book who do the same job? like this. So etheir they release one by one or all the same time they will be more balanced because they will have written at the same time by a team. No more army book playtested gain other army book withi one or two corerules previous edition.

Charistoph
03-12-2013, 15:26
Another example the assault termies thei sergeant have no option, they can be equipped with pair of lightning claw witch regarding the change in power weapon are lame in this ed or with a shield and and a thunder armor. But when Ward at that time made the swaping weapon free Cruddace made them costing 5 points. Why?


Actually Ward did have the TH/SS combo cost a 5 point upgrade in Blood Angels. C:SM was just changed to match.

Asymmetric
03-12-2013, 15:28
Cruddace is inconsistent. His rules are generally okay but not particularly exciting, and there is usually one particular build that is clearly better than any other.


I don't really see how cruddace is that bad really. He's just hit and miss.

Space marines is a decent codex.

Imperial Guard is by far the best version of guard ever printed. It's still functional in 6th edition and is actually capable of producing a variety of army lists. I mean it was 6th edition 40k, not the codex, that sent vendetta's off the scale of being very good to flat out busted.

Poseidal
03-12-2013, 15:30
The old (5th edition) Vendettas were an abomination, even as Fast Skimmers.

Asymmetric
03-12-2013, 15:35
Chaos Marines have still consistently had among the worst codex's for the last 3 iterations. They've just been a mess.

duffybear1988
03-12-2013, 15:42
I don't really see how cruddace is that bad really. He's just hit and miss.

Space marines is a decent codex.

Imperial Guard is by far the best version of guard ever printed. It's still functional in 6th edition and is actually capable of producing a variety of army lists. I mean it was 6th edition 40k, not the codex, that sent vendetta's off the scale of being very good to flat out busted.

The 3rd/4th edition IG codex was better as you could tailor the entire list to fit what you wanted your army to be - jungle fighters/ drop troops/ heavy infantry/ barbarians etc. All the 5th ed codex gave us was mech vets, vendettas and blob squads.

Charistoph
03-12-2013, 15:56
I don't really see how cruddace is that bad really. He's just hit and miss.
That would be one definition of inconsistent...


Chaos Marines have still consistently had among the worst codex's for the last 3 iterations. They've just been a mess.

The 3.5 CSM codex was actually quite well done, the problem was that none of the other codices of the day or after matched it's developmental style. There were things that needed to be toned down and addressed (2 useless FA for a very useful HS and more than one band of Obliterators? Yes, please!), but the overall build style was very much what a codex should be. Numerous options for a generic HQ, Legion "Tactics" to align yourself with one of the original big bads and focus your army's alignment (again, the actual Legion rules needed to be adjusted, but the base concept was quite sound), a lot of customization possible in each of the Marine units, etc.

InstantKarma
04-12-2013, 16:04
I think it should be pointed out for the purposes of this thread that Ward has not written any rules for the past two years, according to the man himself.

Where is this coming from? He's doing ALL the Elf Armybooks for Fantasy and he wrote the BRB for both 6th ed 40k and 8th ed FB. Now to give the man credit the elf books have been quite good relative to his other stuff, and not too overpowered like his 40k garbage (BAs, Necrons and GKs from 5th). He also did do the supplemental codex Iyanden for Eldar so again, the claim he is not writing rules is bogus.

That being said, Vetock and Kelly are my current favorites, probably Vetock over Kelly. Cruddace is...ok, but I agree he does have a tendency to 'underpower' (aside from Codex Space Marines) while Kelly has had a few misses (notably Chaos Space Marines this edition). Vetock seems the most consistent, and I while I'm sure there will be some 'Tau are OP', need I point out Tau were severaly UP until this codex. Overcorrection or simply shock of a low-tier army getting a bump? I haven't read the Iyanden supplement so I'm not sure for 40k we can really judge Ward aside from his 5th ed shenanigans, so he is still blakclisted until further notice.