Tau Empire Codex 2013 | Army Builder Program
Dark Angels Codex 2013
Chaos Daemons Codex 2013
Chaos Space Marines Codex 2012

Warhammer 40k Forum Tau Online

 

Warhammer 40K Forum

Codex Creep - Reversed:
Reply
Old 08 Oct 2007, 00:18   #1 (permalink)
Shas'O
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,117
Send a message via MSN to arguleon-veq
Default Codex Creep - Reversed:

After just reading the 'What makes an army beardy' thread, I got to thinking about what the high end armies are at the moment.

For years and years people have complained about the 'Codex Creep', I didn't always hold to it but many people said that every codex released was better than the one before it, so the latest army was usually the best.

But with GW's new policy of toning down armies, we have the complete opposite. The older codex now have the best armies.

I'd consider the really high end armies to be [off the top of my head] -

DT Guard,
DP Marines,
Assault Cannon - Las/Plas Marines,
Nidzilla.

All of them old codexes. Chaos and Eldar used to play huge parts in the high end of the game, but with the advent of their new Codexes, they are no longer high end armies. You have the Lash armies, but I dont think thats enough really. I still think Eldar are powerful, but not on the level of those I've listed.

The new generation of dexes I'd say consist of -

Eldar,
DA,
BT,
BA,
Chaos.

All of them taking a pretty huge power - cut. DA from a fairly competative force to one which I consider one of the weakest in the game, thats just my opinion though. The rest from really competative to fairly standard.

Obviously you would expect for it to carry on so that eventually they are all on about the same level when new Marine, Nids and Guard Codexes come out.

I guess I'm just rambling really. But I just thought it was interesting how after years and years of complaints about the newest armies being the most powerful we now have a situation where the oldest [some of them anyway] are the most powerful. I guess it aslo shows that GW aren't as totally stupid and deaf to its gamers as many people seem to want to believe.

[My Orks have been my most competative army for years though]
__________________
Brunettes and Beer.
arguleon-veq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08 Oct 2007, 00:33   #2 (permalink)
Shas'O
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,807
Default Re: Codex Creep - Reversed:

I agree fully - when the new Eldar codex came around, people complained endlessly about the two-shot Starcannon. Then Dark Angels rolled around and I would bet that there are a good many players who thought "dear Khaine, imagine if that had happened to us!"

Judging by the rumors and existing Codecies, Orks, like Eldar, are being geared towards more diversity and multiple play-styles - previously they were somewhat less common, and Eldar was considered very elite. Meanwhile, the ever-popular Marines are getting a real kick in the teeth. Woe betide the "Generic Twelve-Year-Old Ultramarines Noob" demographic!
AuinMyrrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08 Oct 2007, 00:34   #3 (permalink)
Kroot Warrior
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 21
Default Re: Codex Creep - Reversed:

I agree, although I don't think the new Codices are weaker, but more balanced. Many of the "strong" armies were outright terrible, such as Iron Warriors, but have now been given a major power cut. I'm fairly happy with the way the Codices are going, honestly. Each one gives you the ability to make a themed and/or balanced list without the headache for GW of balancing a dozen variant lists, which seem to be the major targets of 'cheesiness'.
__________________


Necronated is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08 Oct 2007, 02:01   #4 (permalink)
Ethereal
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 18,087
Default Re: Codex Creep - Reversed:

I would argue that the Tau book was really the turning point. It wasn't really a power cut, but it was the first book that didn't make stronger lists than the version before it.

I just hope they keep going with it. To be honest, while the Chaos book trimmed off some of the excesses, the net result seems to have been an increase in power. They may not dominate as a power-gaming army, but their balanced lists got a lot stronger.
khanaris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08 Oct 2007, 04:31   #5 (permalink)
Shas'El
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,744
Default Re: Codex Creep - Reversed:

I had a long conversion about this with one of the employees at my local store not too long ago. It seemed for quite awhile they were releasing broken codices to compete with the broken one that preceded it and in most cases also had units tailored to combat Marines.

I'm incredibly pleased with the direction GW is taking with the new books. I actually switched to using the DA rules when the codex was out because I liked it so much more than C:SM.

I think that while the Chaos codex may have stronger balanced lists I think the same can be said of DAs as well(maybe Eldar too, I own the book but haven't played with it so I can't say for certain). I can field more, better equipped units for less than using the regular marine codex. The only real drawbacks for me are scouts being elites and the Ravenwing squadron layout. Those are minor problems and just required a little adjustment to my army.

I think that part of the reason that there is so much negative response initially is because some of the newer players may not be used to having a balanced codex for their army. This seems to lead to the cries of armies being "dumbed down" and threats of armies being sold. I find it quite hilarious that time after time these "dumbed down" rules are praised for their diversity and flexibility after they are released.

The only exception so far seems to be the Ork codex. There hasn't been much negative reaction so far. Kind of istrange that the Ork players are the most logical and rational of them all... :shifty:
Cadaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08 Oct 2007, 05:44   #6 (permalink)
Shas'El
 
The Orange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,208
Default Re: Codex Creep - Reversed:

Meh I think the whole codex creep/ reversed, etc. thing has been blown out of proportions. Their are some typical tactics that have become all too common, but that's more of a product of the internet because people can quickly share information with each other, causing what seem to be slightly overpowering combos become standard in just about every army because everyone recommends it, without much though of how such units work in the parameters of certain missions, or against certain foes, causing the "meta-game" as it has been termed.

Regarding your codex groupign AV:
Codex BT was a very early release and I think their (perceived) weakness has more to do with GW just trying to do something different with them, rather then them trying to just weakening them (though it is true that some people dropped them because they couldn't power game anymore).

With codex Eldar, I again don't agree that they'd be apart of that later group of codex's where the intent was to make them less powerful. If anything, IMO, they got better all around. Some comparison could be made about the loss of the Seer council, or the Bel Tan list, and maybe some power was lost there, but those were Variant List, which are gone altogether. The 4th edition codex Eldar replaces the 3rd edition codex Eldar, nothing more, and between the two, 4th edition has improved a lot.

With the Chaos codex, a toning down was in order in some respects, and that happened, but a lot of new things were released, and considering that the Chaos Codex was just released IMO it's to early to tell if GW was successful in creating a balanced codex, or just succeeded in creating a new monster waiting for some power gamer to find the perfect combo. Part of the big Chaos shuffle though, IMO, was due to transparency. Chaos had an enormous armory, and part of the problem was that their was no real way to display these options on the table top. Their was one daemon prince model, and besides maybe having wings, you couldn't really tell what the heck that daemon prince was capable of until he finally hit your army. Why did the DP lose so many options? Partly because it has powerful combos of options, but also partly so that people could now now what exactly they were facing when they saw one of the battlefield (and not the other way around, that is dumbing them down for chaos players).

After speaking with one of the GW guys at GDLA though I think their was some intended dumbing down of the chaos codex. He told me about some of the calls they would get about rules questions, and realized just how atrocious some players understanding of the rules were. One particular call was from some one asking about how their DP rides in a LandRaider. After talking with the person for a while the GW employee on the phone realized that the caller not only had been running his DP out of a LR illegally, but had also gave it equipment far beyond it's limit, etc., etc. Sure a lot of blame should be put on that caller for not understanding their codex, but just imagine, this is a newb player, probably playing with a bunch of other newb players, probably kicking the Klkn out of their armies and probably giving them either a negative experience of the hobby (making them quit after a while) or just making them take up their own chaos armies to cheese ball. Either way theirs a lot a chaos player can get away with (intentionally or not) because the chaos codex had such a wealth of options and restrictions that you'd have to be an expert to even sniff out if an opponent might be playing something wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Khanaris
I would argue that the Tau book was really the turning point. It wasn't really a power cut, but it was the first book that didn't make stronger lists than the version before it.
I find it hard to believe that though, with Tau Empire we saw an addition of several new units, and a tweaking of some of the older units (so how could their be any type of power cut?). I don't know how you can't say that they weren't made better overall, it just that they were not made overpowered in any real sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadaver
The only exception so far seems to be the Ork codex. There hasn't been much negative reaction so far. Kind of strange that the Ork players are the most logical and rational of them all... :shifty:
Not much has been released about the orks rules either (as far as I know) so their isn't really anything to react negatively about, except for the sculpts of the new orks models which were recently released at UKGD, and I think most people will agree that their fantastic, or at least far from bad. Considering the age of the last Ork codex, I don't see how the Orks would be made even weaker, so they'll probably be made stronger, and when those rules come out I predict the cries of Green Cheese to be loud, as always with codex releases.
__________________
The Orange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08 Oct 2007, 07:09   #7 (permalink)
Shas'Saal
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: England
Posts: 214
Send a message via AIM to UltraMagnus Send a message via MSN to UltraMagnus Send a message via Yahoo to UltraMagnus
Default Re: Codex Creep - Reversed:

personally, all the new codices seem very cookie cutterish to me, no more options like chaos legions or craftworlds, everyone playing a certain army has to basically play exactly the same configuration if they want to win
__________________
Please visit my Conversion/Project Blog any comments left would be greatly appreciated!
UltraMagnus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08 Oct 2007, 11:40   #8 (permalink)
Ethereal
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: On the Midnight Ocean
Posts: 26,404
Send a message via MSN to Wargamer
Default Re: Codex Creep - Reversed:

Codex Creep is most certainly dying out, and good riddance!


Seriously, compare 3rd and 4th Ed Codices - if you tried playing 3rd Ed vs 4th Ed, you'd almost certainly lose (except, possibly, with Marines or when Gimmick Guard is used). 3rd Ed vs "5th" Ed, on the other hand, is a pretty fair fight.
__________________
Farewell, Kangaroo Joe, you shall not be forgotten.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Norman
"Wargamer is never wrong, Frodo Baggins; he knows precisely the rules he means to."
Wargamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08 Oct 2007, 12:18   #9 (permalink)
Shas'El
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Fifth circle of hell
Posts: 3,150
Default Re: Codex Creep - Reversed:

Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraMagnus
personally, all the new codices seem very cookie cutterish to me, no more options like chaos legions or craftworlds, everyone playing a certain army has to basically play exactly the same configuration if they want to win
Not really.

you dont need a craftworld codex, or specific rules, to play alaitoc or iron warriors.

its all tied up in one list, in a neat little package. you just dont get the unbelievable cheese found in the old codex (60man seer council, disruption tables, 9 oblits and 4 heavy support, etc)

and in fairness, the eldar, and chaos codices can be played any number of ways and still be competitive.
__________________
greatest band in the universe: www.machinaesupremacy.com

"What warriors of men can stand beside the Space Wolves! The Sons of Fenris they are, hardened in the forge of their harsh world, eager for battle and honour. They are the grey warriors, ashen like the wolf, whose greatest joy is to hear the clamour of steel amidst the din of war. None can step before them, they are the first, proud in their strength and jealous of their renown. Through the storms of the warp they come, upon the very tides of terror, but of such dangers they are uncaring. They are the Space Wolves, the Undefeated, the bane of the Emperor's foes."
Deadnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08 Oct 2007, 13:35   #10 (permalink)
Shas'O
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,741
Default Re: Codex Creep - Reversed:

Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraMagnus
personally, all the new codices seem very cookie cutterish to me, no more options like chaos legions or craftworlds, everyone playing a certain army has to basically play exactly the same configuration if they want to win
Hardly. Let me explain this with an example...

Want to play Biel-Tan? Well there are Aspect Warriors in every FOC spot - go on and make an army using Aspects exclusively.

Want to play Alaitoc? Rangers are Troops choices and can be upgraded to Pathfinders.

Iyanden? Take a full squad of Wraithguard and it becomes a Troops choice.

Saim-Hann? Jetbikes as Troops and give your HQ a bike!

How about Ulthwe? Let's see how many Farseers and Warlocks we can fit into a list...

The same can be said for the new Chaos Codex. With 5 Troops choices - Chaos Marines and a unit unique to each Chaos God - allows you to make themed lists for Thousand Sons, Death Guard, World Eaters, Emperor's Children, or other followers of the 4 Gods. The the ability to take any/all of them if you're Undivided allows for easy Black Legion!
Droids_Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Codex: Daemonhunters and Codex: Witch Hunters available as free downloads! Masked Thespian The Inquisition 0 24 Jun 2010 12:28
Codex Creep is a Good thing Ironwinds General 40K 19 08 Mar 2010 17:02
What is codex creep? cykosis General 40K 4 11 Feb 2009 14:34
Codex Dark Angels: 5th edition, using Codex Space Marines Falstead House Rules 17 13 Oct 2008 23:20
Predator Codex testing/play testers wanted (thanks given in codex) The Return of LeeStar! House Rules 7 06 Nov 2006 08:45