What Is Revisited And Why Should You Care?

Greetings all; I'm milesteg, the fanatical Eldar player that HBMC referred to below, chief author of Codex Eldar Revisited (unsurprisingly) and one of the chief drafters of the Warhammer 40,000 Revisited Rule Book. I am a part of our gaming group which consists of (for example) a business analysis, an actuary, an accountant and a lawyer (me; yes, get your lawyer-jokes out your system now....I know what 10,000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea is.....yes it may be true, but....). HBMC and I started this project back in 2003 as a rewrite of the (then) Codex Eldar under the 3rd edition Trial Assault Rules and Trial Vehicle Rules. With the advent of 4th edition, this project expanded into a rule rewriting exercise for the time system.

That of course begs the question; why bother? What possessed us to undertake such a considerable effort, which has already taken several hundred man-hours of discussions, analysis, rewriting and drafting, playtesting and the like? For that to make sense, a short history lesson is required.....

(cue dream-like vanishing sequence and music...)

3rd Edition, Codex Eldar And A Lawyer To-Be...
The gaming environment was a very different place back in 2003. 4th edition was a yet-unreleased thing that was on the horizon, the 3rd edition Trial Assault Rules had been generally accepted within the gaming community, and the second version of the Trial Vehicle Rules had been released and was gaining acceptance. Additionally, Codex Eldar was old. It had been one of the first fully-released army lists when the transition to 3rd edition was made and it showed.

To understand this, it is necessary to understand how Codex Eldar was meant to operate. The Eldar force does not rely on Armour Saves, exceptional toughness, strength or numbers; it relies on special rules that permit exceptions to the general rules; that is their strength. For example, the Bright Lance counted all AV's above 12 as 12; a special rule instead of simply adding additional Strength to the weapon, and so forth. While this system is a valid method of creating a Codex, it usually does not react well to changes in the general rules.

When Codex Eldar was first released, some of the units were excellent (Banshees, Fire Dragons, Wraithlords), some were reasonable, depending on how they were used (Vypers are a good example), and some were simply terrible, objectively and relative to the other choices (such as the Shining Spears.....). So, at the very beginning, some units dominated, some were used some of the time, and some were used virtually none of the time (3rd ed Vibro-Cannons also being a good example...).

The Trial Assault Rules changed a few things, but most of the army still coped with it. Assault was toned down, so the relative power of Banshees and Scorpions rushing up the table in Wave Serpents still worked, and things like Wraithlords were more balanced. However, the Trial Vehicle Rules truly put a stake through the army. Banshees and Scorpions could not really be used aggressively (no assaulting out of transports), and while the ability to fire all defensive weapons while moving was useful, for some of the stock-standard elements of Eldar armies (like Wave Serpents), there was little additional change and while Vypers did get something of a boost from the TVR, it wasn't sufficient to make up for the lack of fast assault elements (extra Shuriken Cannon shots at BS 3!....and I lose Banshees in Serpents for this? Hmmmm.....).

By the time 4th edition finally hit, it was essentially reduced to Codex Vypers and Fire Dragons. Very little else worked in a competitive sense (especially against some of the other builds out there). Defeating the Scorpion and Banshee rush was trivial, Guardians still had silly 12" guns, Falcons became utterly invincible, and Vypers and Fire Dragons picked up the slack. The previously good units like Banshees and Scorpions were nigh-invalidated under the general changes to the vehicle rules, slower things like Wraithlords got hammered by Escalation, and the changes to scoring units meant that Wave Serpents (being a transport) were no longer scoring (and this does not combine well with being an expensive skimmer tank...). Dark Reapers couldn't be protected being a screen anymore, and the list goes on. Yes, some of the changes of 4th edition were better (say Warp Spiders which went from being nigh-useless to somewhat reasonable), but the army was broken and devising a combined-arms strategy that could work under Escalation nearly had me pulling my hair out.....

It also wasn't just that things were competitive and/or useful; sometimes the units just didn't correspond with the fluff at all, Guardian meatshields being a good example. Often used as a screening unit (screening is discussed below), they were used as cannon fodder to protect the Dark Reapers or other fragile (yet expensive) units. This made little sense; using civilians as expendable casualties, yet, it was one of their best uses given their 12" Shuriken Catapults, only BS 3 on their heavy weaponry and being only 8pts per model. It was a good tactic in the game, but made little sense conceptually.

However, in our eyes, the problem was not just with Codex Eldar. Indeed, we acknowledged that it was old, that some things didn't perform as intended or foreseen (given that 3rd ed was young and relatively untested at the time it was released) and that some of the rules changes led to situations that were never intended. Yes, due to LOTR, it took longer than it should have for a new Eldar Codex to be released and since I wanted to actually use all of my models, we undertook the rewriting process but endeavoured to keep the changes within the existing set of rules.

However, as I mentioned, the advent of 4th ed convinced us that the problem was not limited to a single Codex. GW made some design choices that we simply did not agree with and while (in some cases) we could understand why they made a particular choice, in other instances, we were left scratching our heads. Additionally, some of the chief things that irritated us with 3rd edition were not altered and some things that did work were removed.

Rather than staying in the place of the general, let me use a few specific examples.....

Fourth Edition Vs Revisited
Screening And Target Priority
In 3rd edition, non-vehicle models blocked line of sight up to twice their height and across their base (essentially a cylinder as wide as the base with twice the height of the model). This was informally known as screening. In 3rd edition, this was a tried and true tactic to protect vulnerable units (as described earlier). However, it did have problems. Models would be placed in very unrealistic blocks (Guard being a good example) and it led to a "castling" form of play. Not only was it very difficult to counter (other than with Barrage weapons or the sheer expedient of blasting your way through), it could also be abused by modelling taller models, etc.

GW's response to this problem was to get rid of it completely; nada; zip; gone. Instead, models always shoot at the closest target unless they pass a Leadership Test (vehicles always assumed to pass such tests). Now, I agree, it is a faster and simpler system. Models are often placed in a more realistic formation (spread out, etc) rather than being all in massive, contiguous blocks, but it does lead to a few problems.

Firstly, right off the bat, higher Ld armies receive an immediate boost. Secondly, it becomes nigh-impossible to actually protect anything that is fragile; the durability of a unit must be inherent; it cannot use the durability of another unit as a substitute (like a screen). As such, this exacerbates the "first turn win" situation, and encourages multiple identical units (as more expensive elites simply become higher-priority targets).

The fourth issue is that it leads to situations that simply make little sense; how is it that with a simple Leadership Test that a Space Marine Devastator squad can see "through" 100+ Ork Boyz that are right in front of them, to shoot a unit of Boyz at the very back of them? Yes, models are deemed to move and are not considered to be statues, but how on earth can you draw LOS through a solid wall of models? Keep in mind, I'm not talking about shooting a larger unit or anything like that; models that are identically sized too the models that are in between them and the shooters.

It is simpler, but not best. Our system uses the magic cylinder system (essentially), but it is projected along coherency lines (allowing for more realistic formations) and only goes as high as the model. However, we have introduced means to counter it (such as Sniper weaponry, elevation, a sighting test, etc). The problem with screening in 3rd edition was that it was often uncounterable and unrealistic; we've solved both. You can protect you fragile units, but if your enemy has the right tools (or uses the right tactics), this can be overcome.

Movement And Firing Restrictions
3rd edition was terribly static (if a standard vehicle moved, it could fire one weapon! Woo-hoo!) and of course, firing Ordnance meant that every other weapon couldn't fire! This meant that vehicles became Main Battle Bunkers as if you moved, you wouldn't be able to fire with many of your weapons, and often you would lose your Hull Down protection, so again, why move? Infantry was often similar; why move out of cover and prevent the heavy weapon from firing and then only firing one shot at 12" with a rapid fire weapon? Again, why move?

4th edition addressed this somewhat, but very conservatively. Vehicles could fire more weapons on the move, but not enough. Ordnance still silenced other weapons. Moving one model in a unit meant that all models counted as moving, hence heavy weapons couldn't fire. Fleet was unreliable and standard infantry could only move 6" a turn, which truly hurt footsloggers, especially in light of the new rapid fire rules (etc).

We took the 4th edition changes further to create a truly fluid system:

• standard vehicles may move one speed bracket (8" in our rules; equivalent of 6" in 4th edition) and may fire all main and all defensive weaponry;
• firing an Ordnance weapon does not silence everything else;
• movement of models is determined on an individual basis (not for the whole unit);
• models may move and fire heavy weapons with a -1 BS modifier;
• all standard Infantry models (and things like Jump Infantry, etc) can choose not to shoot and may run an additional 3". In light of this, Fleet was made a flat 6" additional movement; and
• rapid fire weapons could shoot once at maximum range and twice at 12", irrespective of movement.

These simple changes meant that vehicles became tanks again (ie they moved!), using heavy weapons didn't ensure that a unit was simply stuck in one place for the whole game and footslogging infantry could actually move faster when needed (like Orks) and changing Fleet to a flat, consistent distance removed many dice rolls from the game (for the Eldar player at least...).

When models can only do one thing at a time, it is usually best to do things that hurt the enemy (ie shooting). This leads to a static game and single-purpose units. In Revisited, things can move AND hurt the enemy, which leads to a far more fluid, dynamic and enjoyable game (seriously; I'm not just using the corporate-speak!)

Firing At Multiple Targets
This is closely linked with relaxing the restrictions on moving and firing; the ability to fire at multiple targets. One of the biggest problems of 3rd and 4th edition is that units (as a rule) can only fire at one target. This immediately means that mixing weapons is a no-no as it leads to wasted fire. For example, if you equip a Space Marine Devastator squad with 2 Heavy Bolters and 2 Lascannons, you will always be wasting fire as you'll be shooting at a target type which is good for one weapon type and bad for the other (for example, vs AV 12+ vehicles or gribblies; either target is a good use of points for one type of weapon and inefficient (or useless) for the other). As such, these sorts of weapons teams always needed to have the same weapon, with few exceptions.

It also meant that small-arms were utterly relegated to the place of irrelevance. When a Lascannon in a Guard unit fires at a tank, the 8 other Guardsmen (or 7 + Sergeant) cannot use their Lasguns to any effect; those points and those weapons are wasted. Given the relative power of heavy weapons, this only emphasises that standard troopers are simply wounds for the heavy weapons rather than actually contributing to the fight in any effective manner.

The same is true of 3rd and 4th edition tanks. Mixing weapons on Leman Russes (for example) just doesn't work due to the wasting fire issue. Additionally, as HBMC says, defensive weapons aren't. Instead of blazing away at infantry that are closing in at close quarters (say Heavy Bolters on a Russ), they have to fire at what everything else shoots at. So, if the target is more than 36" away and the Russ is taking a Battlecannon shot; too bad. If they have (for some reason) a hull-mounted Lascannon, then either the Russ must take a single BS 3 Lascannon shot at the tank and waste its sponson Heavy Bolters (if taken), or must waste the Lascannon as it shoots infantry.

Our changes in their area are very straightforward. Non-Vehicle units (such as Infantry) can split fire at up to 2 targets via a Leadership Test. Nominate the primary and secondary targets, allocate the weapons against each and then roll the dice. If passed, fire at the primary and secondary; if failed, only against the primary. Yes, this does benefit higher Ld armies, but the power of this ability nowhere approaches the GW 4th edition "Magical Ignore The Models In Front Of You" Test. For Vehicles, they may always split their fire at any number of targets; one per weapon if the owning player desires.

This very simple change opens up a world of options; mixed weapons, more multi-purpose squads and vehicles that have truly main armaments and truly defensive weapons. Splitting fire is so simple yet so crucial to what differentiates Revisited from 3rd and 4th edition.

Other Issues
There are also other places where we diverge from the GW rule set. This includes majority Toughness (majority range!), certain changes they made to the Assault rules (such as no pursuit if no models in base-to-base contact at the end of the Assault, checking whether a model is Engaged at each Initiative step, etc) and their scrapping of Hull Down for the silly Obscured rule (which is simply insufficient protection).

A Different Flavour
As you can see from the examples above, much of our work has been taking a certain GW idea (like defensive weaponry) and taking it to the logical conclusion. GW has often taken a very, indeed overly-conservative approach in some areas, and then has used the "pendulum" design method in others. However, there is a reason for this divergence....

GW is simplifying things and streamlining it, often for a younger and/or more inexperienced audience who are more interested in transitory pick-up games and the like. They are not interested in the intricacies of the Assault sequence or the drafting of a particular Universal Special Rule. They just want to get stuck in, have some fun and the like.

Our group is different. In many respects, we represent the grizzled veterans of wargaming, not just in terms of the number of years that we've been involved, but in terms of the energy, time and not incidentally monetary investment that we have made. HBMC and I estimate that we must have spent at least AUD 10,000 each on our hobby and indeed, this is probably conservative. We have invested (indeed, the whole group) hundreds of man hours in terms of discussions, army list creation, game design, playtesting, drafting, rewriting, etc. We bring our professional skills to bear in this arena and we take it to a higher level.

We don't want an incredibly streamlined system where terrain, LOS and the like are all abstracted to a much higher level (ie many people play where all terrain is area terrain, etc). Simpler, but not better. Yes, it may make for a more straightforward game if you can only shoot at one target, but it limits the potential tactical options enormously. Yes, many may not care that their army list isn't all that competitive because it is "themed" or "has cool models in it", but for us, we want every single choice to be useful and worthy of a place in its Codex and in the game. We want depth, tactics, strategy and a fluid game. We want options, choices and dilemmas.

Really, the one of the chief elements of our drive to do this came from frustration. As time went on, GW's rulings and design choices became less and less sensical to us. Whether it was the now (infamous) FAQ answers like "Why would you put a Honorifica Imperialis on an Enginseer" or "Of course! They can smell the incense a mile off!", particular design choices for Codices which just made little sense to us (why on earth are Orks Strength 3 base??) or points values which simply made some choices inevitable better or worse than others or just didn't make any sense (why is a second identical heavy weapon on a Wraithlord counted as a twin-linked weapon, yet you still pay full the points cost for it? Same goes for Tyranid weapon symbiotes.....). Another good one is the change that prevented units from assaulting on the same turn as they disembark, hence neutering transport-borne assault forces (when being used in any aggressive sense).

I could go into further detail and examples, but you get the idea :-).

This is also a key point though; we are not GW haters. Despite HBMC's often cynical (and cutting) remarks, we want to like GW, but we have often found ourselves utterly dumbfounded by their choices. We love the background, we love the game, we love the models. However, the rules are important to us and GW's history of loose (and often simply poor) drafting, ambiguous rules, strange points values and desire to streamline and simplify forced us to strike out on our own.

GW, if you would simply write tight rules, well-drafted rules without having such obvious disparities of value and power in your rules and points values, this project would be unnecessary. We want to like you, but you make it a bit difficult for us.......

The other element of this is that we've spent thousands of dollars on models; we want to get utility out of them. I don't want to never be able to take certain units & models because game designers with no connection to me make choices that make little or no sense to me and directly impact on my enjoyment of the game. Yes; the 3rd edition Biel-tan rush was fun, but after a while, its gets old...much like 3 Falcons in 4th edition......

What Is Revisited?
Revisited is about gamer sovereignty. It is about gamer choice. It is about taking back ground (namely the fun) which seems to have been caught up in profit-seeking, poor design (a "near enough is good enough" attitude) and a confused direction. No, I don't regard the GW design staff as idiots in any sense of the word. They are obviously talented, gifted people who often have excellent ideas, but lacking in implementation.

We are lawyers, actuaries, accountants, analysts; we're thinkers. We're rigorous in our analysis and dedicated to the task. We only do this part time (and life has a way of getting in the way....), but we believe that we can improve upon GW's implementation. We don't want perfection (there is a balancing act involved with games at this size and level of abstraction) and we don't claim to be infallible (we've learnt along the way), but one of the key reasons why we have such strength in these areas is because of our priorities.

GW are ideas men, excellent in creating the background and inspiring people. We have our own ideas (obviously), but our priority is not just getting something that looks good, is reasonably tested and then relying on a "spirit of the game" approach to carry you through. We want a rule set that stands up to vigorous scrutiny, where RAW is RAI (Rules As Intended) and a system that can accomodate casual play and competitive tournaments. Our group wants tight, unambiguous, elegant rules to play with.

In Defence Of GW...
Before I sound too high and mighty, I do acknowledge that GW does have something of a harder time than us. They have to not only do all of the rules writing, but also need to sculpt models, deal with stores, sell the said models, turn a profit, invest in R&D, etc. We come from a position of relative freedom; that much is apparent.

However, despite that, we believe that GW can still improve its drafting and that it is not an impossible feat. The rules don't have to be in legalese to be clear, they don't have to be technical to be precise. It is a matter of priorities; in a competitive environement, RAI doesn't cut it. The RAW must be clear, precise, accurate and unambiguous. Finally, it must be elegant.

This Is A Summary!
Yes, in typical lawyer-style, my summary is longer than most people's full replies :-). This post is designed to give you an insight into why this blog (and project) exists and what we're trying to achieve. We seek to make our documents available to the public so that if people want to try them out, they too can enjoy something different and (hopefully) better than what they're used to.

Over the coming days, weeks and months, I'll be writing more about Revisited, certain rules changes we've made and will create some unit analyses for Eldar units (unsurprisingly, my speciality :-)). I hope that you've enjoyed reading this and that it serves as a useful summary and as a springboard for you to delve a bit deeper into what we are creating here!

Cover-2-Cover: Apocalypse...

Hello all,

Hopefully some time this weekend I will be able to post up my Cover-2-Cover review of GW's latest attempt to make money - the Apocalypse rulebook 40K expansion.

I intend for this review to be far more positive than my Chaos Codex review, mainly because I like the Apocalypse book (and the Chaos Codex is a stinking pile of human waste), so my usual rampant cyncism will be contained to the bits I find particularly funny.

Furthermore, whilst Disco Stu will continue to post up his tactics and strategies for 4th Edition rules, we shall all soon venture into the world of Warhammer 40,000 Revisited - the game system, based upon 3rd and 4th Ed 40K, that we wrote in direct responce to the endless crap rules coming out of Games Workshop.

This game has been in development and testing for as long as 4th Ed has been around, and we have a good stable of Codices to go with it. They're not a dramatic departure from the current ruleset, but they do iron out a number of the wrinkles in the rules as well as add a few fun things in to make games more interesting (vehicles and squads being able to fire at different targets is probably the main one).

One of our co-writers, and the owner of the largest Eldar army in living memory, shall elaborate on this soon. After we've introduced you all to that, we will then go into examples of gameplay to show the mechanics of how this system works within the game.

Until then, my review shall be out soon... I hope.

Units 101 Spot - Sentinals

And so we come to the second of our Units 101 Spot articles - this time on a lesser loved unit of the Imperial Guard - Sentinels

Sentinels stand wierdly situated as the only fast scouting unit in the entire Imperial armory - the next most lightly armored unit is the Chimera/Hellhound chassis, starting at twice the points cost. The unit can be armed with a variety of weapons includind the standard issue multi-laser, an autocannon, or a lascannon. The Sentinel otherwise has the stats of a regular guardsmen... well, a S5 AV10 guardsmen worth 35 points....



So why take Sentinels?

Sentinals are actually a great unit to take as an Imperial Guard player.

Firstly, it is a rather mobile heavy weapon able to strike most areas of the board - and mobile firepower is something often lacking in a static IG lineup.

Combine this mobility with the Scouts special rule, and the Sentinel is often able to be close touching the opponents deployment zone on the first turn if you want it to. The Scouts special rule is also good in escalation missions, for obvious reasons.

The other reason is the ability to customise squads - do you want one Sentinel in a unit all on its own to take a death or glory shot on a falcon or land raider? Perhaps 3 armed with gribbly killing multi-lasers, or tank hunting lascannon? You can even take close combat oriented Sentinels armed with S5 power weapons if you get the Forgeworld version.

How to use Sentinels -

Well, firstly lets look at the options. The Sentinel comes in squadrons of 1-3, and the units have to retain coherency (useful to remember, trust me). They can come with one of three standard weapons - a multilaser, autocannon or lascannon. A squadron of sentinals can have a mixed array of weapons, though I would suggest that you would think mighty hard before mixing and matching different types of weapons. In terms of the vehicle armory - Extra Armor is sometimes useful to get against those glancing stunned results, and an Armored Canopy can also help in increasing the units durability - though at 20 points, you have to be certain as to what the unit will be doing and that the extra cost is really worth it. Also a spotlight is often useful for those nightfight games as the squadron can get close and highlight several units quickly. And finally, smoke launchers may come in handy if you are planning to have them receive a fair bit of firepower in their mission. But enough about options, we should look at the tactics -

Tactic 1 - Kill Team

Set the squadron, or multiple squadrons as needed to killing one particular target as quickly as possible. It may be a gunboat, or a heavy weapons squad, or a transport full of combat troops. Make sure the unit has the weapons for the job - multilasers for anything T4 or less or AV10, autocannon for AV 10-12 or anything with a 4+ save (excellent against Eldar/Tau), and lascannon for AV 13-14, IC's, Monsterous Creatures. The mobility of the unit will allow it to usually get into range and LOS for a round of shooting, and the Sentinels are easy to ignore, possibly enabling them to survive even if they are the closest targets. Just make sure that you pick a target you are able to kill, and remember that the best units to attack are those that are hard/impossible for the rest of your army to get. Any IG army has lots of firepower - it is being able to use mobility to get that firepower where it needs to be which makes Sentinel's useful.

Tactic 2 - Operation Human Shield

Sentinals can often be in combat quickly, due to the fact that they get a free scout move. Now an AV10 walker doesn't sound like much, and against a Dreadnought or a unit with a powerfist, it isn't. However, against a typical las/plas marine squad, or indeed anything at all S3 or below, Sentinals are nigh invulnerable - a regular S-4 unit at WS 4 has a 1-72 chance of destroying a single Sentinel. This means that Sentinels can often hold up shooting units for an entire game - a great way of reducing the amount of firepower coming in against you from the enemy's fire base or getting rid of those pesky mobile firepower units such as Stealth Suits or Storm Troopers etc. And remember, combat blocks line of sight! However, stay away from power fist units and the like, as your Sentinels will die very, very quickly.

Tactic 3 - Hammer the Weak

Sentinels are great for dealing with that flanking unit that your enemy always takes that is never quite worth spending the time killing or deploying to counter, but still causes chaos in your lines. This could be fast IC's, Assassins, a small unit of jetbikes or something similar. Basically, you use your Sentinels to pummel that IC/small squad into the ground. Again, multilaser against T3 models with invulnerable saves (Assassins, Eldar, Tau), Autocannon against anything with a 4+ or worse save (most jetbikes, some Eldar Aspect Warriors, Tau Firewarriors, etc), Lascannons against tough MC's/IC's. It is a great way of dealing with issues without having to change your game strategy.

Tactic 4 - Damn the Torpedoes!

Imperial Guard often have a few tanks that receive a lot of firepower. If you want to survive that first turn, you may consider surging a squadron or two of Sentinels into general line of sight, though obscured enough to count as hull down. This will either force the enemy to turn some of the firepower he would normally spend upon your lavishly upgraded tanks onto the Sentinels, or leave your Sentinels in prime position to run amock the following turn. Works best against sides with limited or inaccurate anti tank weaponry (Tau, Necrons, some styles of Eldar/Marine/Nid lists, etc).


So how do I counter Sentinels?

Basically, the easiest way is to just shoot them and be done with it, no more thinking. If, however, you have more important targets, just don't forget about the Sentinels. But just remember, they are only a maximum of three heavy weapons at BS 3. So be wary, especially if they seem to be lining up a shot at something you don't want shot or if they are going to be within charge range of your firing line, but in any case make sure that your targeting priorities are on track.

Hope this was helpful, more Units 101 Spot soon.

Apocalypse Review

Now, because of my slack co-authors, nothing has been written for the past couple of weeks. Now, you probably haven't notices cause you are either putting together all your models for massive games, or we have no readers. Either way...

Apocalypse

So I thought I would put up my first impressions of Apocalypse -

Firstly - GW has made a very nice game system. My only two issues is with the deployment zones, as it can leave one side with almost nowhere to put anything on the board, and the strategic reserve rule - as it can give a player leave to put his entire army on in the third turn - sometimes right on top of the enemy.

However, the rest of the rules are fantastic. The barrage template is very fun (and indeed, very useful at targeting group formations). The new war machines are almost impossible to kill outside of hand to hand combat, but hey, I guess that is the idea. The various strategic assets are interesting - especially the careful planning and flank march assets, as well as disruption beacon and strategic redeployment - but they all have other strategic assets to counteract them. I think that the data sheets are great - though I think GW will win a lot of friends if it continues to release new ones online, especially for those sides with only a few (Necrons, Tau, Dark Eldar, Chaos etc).

Important thoughts are - make sure you put a turn time limit in, with allowances for hoard armies. Otherwise, people think too much.

Actually, I will make that its own point - play more, think a little bit less. Don't stop thinking, just don't micromanage where every single damned lascannon or tank will be. Otherwise you run out of time.

Also, I would suggest putting a % points limit as to what people place in strategic reserve - that way people don't leave entire armies in there, and the game can get underway. Now, I don't say that sides should set up just to be shot, but making sure both sides have models on at the beginning ensures a competative start up bidding time.

Final thing - I know Apocalypse is supposed to be a "bring anything you want" kind of game, but adding 2nd ed points percentage rules for force formations seems to me to be a great idea - somthing like a minimum of 25% Troops, no more than 50% in any of the following - HQ, Heavy Support, Elites, Fast Attack. It just puts a limit as to the cheese on the table. I know that shouldn't be an issue, but at some point it probably will be.

All in all, something fun for all, but just take care with the liberties the format permits. I'll post up our first Apoc game soon.

Cover-2-Cover: Codex Chaos Review...

Hello all,

This review was posted on the DakkaDakka forums a week or two before the Chaos Codex was released in stores. I make no apologies for the biased nature of the review - it is my opinion after all - but I do try to look at some of the (very few) good sides to this Codex. It passed muster at Dakka, including their 'be polite' policies, and was the catalyst for Dakka's largest and fastest growing thread of all time.

Enjoy:

An Exercise in Futility –OR– Commissar Calgar’s review of Codex: Chaos Space Marines

Hello all,

That time is nearly upon us. Yes, it’s nearly time for a vibrant and colourful Codex to be reduced into a dull and lifeless husk of its former self thanks to the kind yet increasingly unimaginative souls at Games Workshop. That’s right children, the new Chaos Codex is only days away, and the clamouring hoards want to know one thing:

How badly did they fail?

I’ll answer that question over the course of this review, but I want everyone to know that I’m not just going to look at the rules itself, but everything from fluff, presentation, colour section, everything. Just like my Codex Guard review from a while back, this is a cover-to-cover review that do I as a service to the cynical and jaded members of DakkaDakka, and even those of us too blind to see just how much GW has screwed up (again!). I won’t be going through page by page, and will gloss over some sections, but I will highlight specific sections if they are deemed worthy (or too funny not to point out!). And yes, my often-rampant cynicism will colour this review, but I am positive about some points - not many, but some. And I can maintain an air of seriousness in some parts. I get pretty angry in the Daemon section - you have been warned.

So, as this is a cover-to-cover review what better place to start than with the cover!

The Cover:

I really like the cover of this edition of the Chaos Codex. The main object of the picture may not be Abaddon, but the picture is very similar to the old 2nd Ed Codex. For those of you that remember, the old 2nd Ed Codex saw fit to not only give us rules for different types of Daemons, but also gave us a list for Daemon World armies, meaning we didn’t have to wait 1-6 years to get rules to differentiate Bloodthirsters and Lords of Change.

Where was I? Oh yes. The cover.

I do like the cover. It’s a nice re-imagining for those of us who were around in the days of 2nd Ed. Colourful, vibrant, full of life – it’s everything this Codex isn’t, and as such makes a lot of false promises. More importantly, the cover also states that this is a Chaos Space Marine Codex. This is, of course, a lie, as there are very few things I’d call ‘Chaotic’ in this book.

So, onto the book itself.

Page 1:

I mention page one separately as it contains a large picture of a Chaos Star and, yep, a few skulls as well, but also contains the author’s names in very small text right at the bottom of the page.

The authors of this train wreck are Gavin ‘They Still Let Me Write Rules’ Thorpe, and Alessio ‘I Should Know Better Than This’ Cavatore. Interestingly my spellchecker knew the words ‘Alessio’ and ‘Cavatore’, but suggested ‘Failure’ as an alternative to ‘Gavin’ and ‘Thorpe’. Now I mention the authors because when I get to this end of the review I have a few things to mention on the full credits page, and because I found it funny that the author’s names were so small at the bottom, almost as if they were hoping someone wouldn’t see it was them who wrote it.

Page one has a scary, spooky boarder reminiscent of the old Realms of Chaos books. I assume this is their attempt to gain some credibility. Truthfully, they’ll need every shred they can get

Page 3:

Page three is your typical introduction page. I mentioned it only because a couple of the headings made me laugh:

1. Why Collect a Space Marine Army?
The immediate answer to that is ‘I want my loyalists to have more spikes’, as there’s nothing very Chaotic about this Codex.
2. How does this Codex Work?
I’m tempted to say it doesn’t. Heh.

Also has the obligatory link to GW online. Hopefully they’ll have some of their wonderful example lists up soon that usually contain things such as randomly selected units and Havoc Squads with 4 different heavy weapons…

Page 4:

Oooh! They are trying to do Realms of Chaos. Again with the spooky boarder surrounding some fluff about letting a galaxy be slightly singed or something similar.

This fluff piece is interesting as it really hits home what GW are attempting to do with this Codex. The Horus Heresy is not mentioned, and the formally abundant Traitor Legions have become the ‘Traitor Legions and Renegade Chapters’. They are obviously trying to abandon the Legions as what Chaos is represented by. There will be more on this later.

Page 5:

This is some new art that represents much of the art in the book. The last Codex had a very distinct theme – Chaos killing poor, hapless Cadians. This time it’s different – it’s Chaos killing Loyalists. And there are piles of dead Marines lying around. The Defiler art is nice, and I think the thing in the background it’s a Lord of Battle, for anyone who remembers that from Epic. I like it.

Page 6:

Much like page 4, this introductory fluff piece goes into detail that this is a Codex about fallen Loyalists, not the Traitor Legions. To me, at least, it is interesting, as despite my ire with this book over the dropping of the Traitor Legion rules, the concept of Renegade Chapters and fallen Loyalists has never really been explored. We got a little bit of the Red Corsairs back in 2nd Ed, but haven’t had much more of that since then. As I said, I find it interesting and it’s just a pity that GW couldn’t find a balance between those of us who want to play the Traitor Legions, and those of us who want to play Naughty Ultramarines.

Pages 7-11:

This section details Chaos quite nicely. It talks about the creation of the Chaos Gods, the essence of Chaos, and the Champions of the Chaos Gods. We may make fun of Gav for a lot of things, and lot of them are justified as well, but one thing I’ve always liked is his writing style. I loved his Last Chancers books and, although not high literature or art, they were fun. The fluff in this Codex is also fun.

But I have to complain about something, otherwise I wouldn’t be who I am, so let’s pick on… Khorne.

‘Khorne embodies mindless and absolute violence, destroying everything and everyone within reach, slaying both friend or foe alike.’ – Codex: When Loyalists Go Bad, Page 9.

I really do long for the days when Khorne not only embodied mindless slaughter, but martial pride and prowess – skill and ability within combat in all its forms. I want Khorne to go back to being the bloodthirsty God of War, where power could be gained both through hacking off someone’s head with an axe and through blasting them with a massive gun.

Some of us must remember the old Khornate Daemon Engines of Space Marine, specifically the Great Cannon of Khorne. Sure, it was possibly one of the more silly models GW has made, ranking up their with their first attempts at making Thunderhawk Gunships models, but it was a representation of Khorne as a master of combat, no matter the type of combat.

All fiction is based around conflict, and internal conflicts are often the most interesting types. The dichotomy of Khorne – one part bloodthirsty killer, the other part proud and honourable warrior – has, to me at least, made him the most interesting God, even more interesting than the relationship between Nurgle and Tzeentch. To see the Blood God distilled over time to a maniac who just wants to kill everything is quite saddening. Anyway, moving on.

This section goes into some more depth with Chaos Warbands, and, like before, makes only the most fleeting of references to the Horus Heresy. They also talk about Spawndom and Daemonhood, including a nice picture of a Daemon Prince toppling a Marine Dreadnought.

Pages 12-15

Wow! A heading in big bold type – THE HORUS HERESY. We all knew they had to acknowledge it eventually. Let’s see how they do, hey?

It talks about the corruption of the Primarchs, Horus especially, and talks about the virus bombing of Istvaan III and the fighting that broke out between Loyalist and Traitor elements of the Death Guard, World Eaters and Emperor’s Children. They also talk about Captain Garro of the Death Guard and how he captured the Eisenstein and flew back to Terra to warn the Emperor.

This section is truly excellent and Gav goes into quite a bit of depth, from the arrival of Traitor AdMech units, the Drop Site Massacres including a little detail of the progression of the battle, starting with the assault on the Iron Hands main force before the Chaos forces moved onto wiping out most of the Raven Guard and Salamanders.

I must congratulate them on writing up new fluff rather than just copying and pasting old fluff from previous editions of the Chaos Codex. Yes, it’s all from the new Horus Heresy books, but it’s nice to see non-regurgitated text for a change.

The section also makes mention of ‘The Scouring’, the period immediately following the Horus Heresy where the Space Marine Legions and the Imperial Army reclaimed much of the galaxy. I heard a while back that this is to be covered in the novels as well, so that sounds like an interesting part of Imperial History not yet covered by the fluff in any great detail.

Pages 17-24:

This section goes back to Renegade Marines, and while it is interesting it’s the typical ‘vague’ GW fluff that gives you hints at events, but doesn’t go into detail as they’re designed to be plot-hooks for your own Renegade Army. Nevertheless, it is an interesting read, and presents a side of Chaos we don’t really know. The Traitor Legions aren’t completely forgotten, and their time in the Eye of Terror and their hatred for the Imperium is mentioned, so that’s good.

We do go into depth with one story about a Sergeant from the Sons of Guilleman’s 4th Company. It has some nice detail, and, like with the other fluff, it’s fun, so quite a welcome addition.

We also get a bit about the fanaticism of the Word Bearers and the insidious nature of the Alpha Legion. There’s a pretty cool story about the Alpha Legion infiltrating the Emperor’s Swords Chapter over a period of 300 years, resulting in the theft of their geneseed and the complete destruction of all Loyalist elements of the Chapter.

This section contains a lot of colour photos of different Renegade Chaos Chapters. Sadly, all of the Traitor Legions are pigeon holed into this section, proving once again that all your wonderful Alpha Legion and Word Bearer armies are nothing more than a fancy paint job in this Codex.

But let’s have a little fun and pick apart some of these silly Chapter names:

Angels of Ecstasy – Almost as derivative as ‘Blood Ravens’, don’t’cha think?
Bleak Brotherhood – Do they cry themselves to sleep?
Brotherhood of Darkness – I take back my comments about the Angels, this Chapter is derivative.
Claws of Lorek – Cool colour scheme. It’s like tiger-stripe on black.
Company of Misery – These all sound like bad Emo band names. If the Legion of Bonham is in here, I’ll cry…
Death Shadows – Snore.
Disciples of Destruction – Gav has discovered alliteration!
Dragon Warriors – Aren’t they a Cursed Founding Chapter?
Iron Warriors – They look pink for some odd reason. I guess NMM’s don’t work on paper…
Knights of Blood – God…
Lords of Decay – Excellent. Why not call them the Guards of Death. Let’s have the Eaters of Worlds and the Warriors of Iron. How ‘bout the Bearers of Word?
Punishers – Who look like they’re dressed up for Halloween.
The Sanctifiers – Cool name for Traitors, I have to say.
The Reborn – Cooler name for Traitors.
Skull Takers – They look about as threatening as 1KSons in the last Codex.
Steel Brethren – Legion of Black! Legion Alpha! Children of the Emperor!
Unknown – HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA!
Warriors of Mayhem – Fighters of Craziness. Troops of Insanity! Parabola of Mystery!


There’s a page about the Black Legion that is nice, including their Legion Banner that was held aloft over Castle Wernerstien. When I first read that I thought it said Castle Wolfenstein, then I had an image of Space Marines fighting Nazi’s. That would rule. The variant colour scheme for the Black Legion is also very cool.

There’s a bit about the Planet of Steel, currently occupied by the Iron Warriors. The Iron Warriors get a bit of fluff for themselves. No mention of Lord Petros Heinous and his legions of Heavy Support choices though.


And that brings the fluff to an end. Now we’re into the rules. It’s all downhill from here folks.

Pages 25-28:

We know the rules for Marks. They’re a gross simplification. No more Blood Rage, True Grit, or anything resembling interesting rules. They’re just +1A, +1I, +1T and some funky Invul rules for 1KSons.

We get stuff on Icons without any rules. Mentions of Havocs for some reason. There’s a whole paragraph on how Havocs love to use Rhinos. Umm… what? Stuff on Chosen and Chaos Bikers. Boring, boring, boring. Chosen can Infiltrate. Whatever. Terminators can always Deep Strike for some reason.

Page 29:

Possessed get their own special mention because of just how much they suck. How can you use a unit where you don’t know what they’re capable of until just before the battle? How can you plan to use them when you don’t know if they’ll be getting Scouts, Power Weapons or Fleet of Foot? Moreover, this is done after deployment, so you don’t even know how you’ll use them until after you’ve been forced to place them on the table. What if you placed them back and rolled Scouts? What if you placed them forward and scored Furious Charge?

This unit is hopeless. I love the new models, but they are unusable.

Pages 30-44:

Here we get the ‘Codex without the points’ part of the Codex, the bit where they give you all the rules, but none of the prices and none of the (extremely limited) options. And just like the Dark Angel ‘Codex’ and Codex: Falcon Grav Tanks, it’s as maddeningly useless as before. Chaos players had a complicated ‘Dex with the last edition, but now they have to flip back and forth to find out what a Bloodthirster… wait… sorry… Bloodthirsters don’t exist now. Let me start again. Now they have to flop back and forth to find out what rules their units have and then back to see what options they can get.

On the bright side, Chaos players that own Codex: Dark Angels can just keep the front section of that book open and the army list from the Chaos Codex. As Chaos and Loyalist are so utterly identical now, it should cut down time on flipping back and forth through the book.

Chaos Lords are WS6. Ok, doesn’t matter all that much. They have an inherent 5+(I) save. Sorcerers have Force Weapons, which I hate. I liked it when Force Weapons were something loyalists had. Wait! How could I be so stupid? This Codex is just When Loyalists Go Bad. By rights Razorbacks and Land Speeders should have been included in this book.

Daemon Prince. Wow. How the might have fallen hey? Yeah, ok, inherent WS7 and S6 is nice, as are the 4th Wound & Attack. But talk about dull!

The Spawn is terrible. No armour save makes it virtually impossible to use. It doesn’t even have a 5+(I) daemonic aura save.

Raptors are just Assault Marines. They’re identical. There’s no ‘Chaos’ here.

Now Oblits are Techmarines. Ok, whatever. I really do not know why people think these are awesome units. They’re more expensive than they used to be, their stats have gotten worse and they’ve lost their Heavy Bolters and Autocannons.

Berzerkers, IMO, are actually under-costed. Sure, they lost their Chainaxes, but they removed that idiotic Blood Rage that made them so difficult to control, gave ‘em Frags and F-Charge as standard, and bumped their WS to 5, so they’re effectively hitting everyone on 3+. All for less points than your typical Berzerker from the last Codex (which came in at 24 w/Frags, F-Charge and Chainaxes).

With 1KSons it’s your typical GW pendulum swing, and they’ve swung it hard. What was once a 24-point Bolter Marine with 2 wounds has become an AP3 spitting Marine that shrugs off fully half the firepower you direct at them. They’re still slow.

Plague Marines may be tough, but damn are they expensive. These guys are good on paper, and probably good in game, but I think the ‘more men’ factor will eventually weigh against the Plague Marines, as you might be able to save points and buy more of the cheaper Noise Marines and leave dealing with enemy assault troops to Princes with the Lash.

The Sonic Blaster is still stupidly overpriced. 5 points each for a few more bolter shots isn’t all that special. Noise Marines are lucky as they’re probably one of the few units that can do a lot of things. It’s the I5 that does it, as their HTH abilities are increased significantly by their ability to swing before mostly everyone. They are also the only unit in the Codex that can be small with a heavy weapon. And speaking of the Heavy Weapons, Blastmasters are not worth 40 points. Not by anyone’s standards. True, even with the 40 point Blastmaster, it’s cheaper to buy 5 Noise Marines and a Blastmaster than it is 10 of useless CSMs and a single heavy weapon, but c’mon – 40 points for a blast Krak Launcher? How do GW honestly come up with these prices.

The Dreadnought rules ensure that no one will ever use one. The Fire Frenzy ensures that no one will ever give them decent guns if they do take one. Is it clear that these guys aren’t getting a new model? I’m sure if there was a new plastic Chaos Dread kit, it’d have totally roXx0r rules… but it’s the same metal one from 2nd Ed with the now-illegal Thunder Hammer and Power Scourge, so no, no good rules for it, only rules to ensure that they won’t sell any more. Pity the Forge World dreads are so pretty…

Oh, and I’d like to mention that the Chaos Dreadnought has access to one – count ‘em – one vehicle upgrade. Extra Armour. For 15 points. As I said above, no one’s gonna be bringing Dreads after this book hits.

GW wants to emphasise the HTH nature of the Defiler. To do this they gave the Defiler the same weapon skill as a Guardsman. They also made it BS3, so it’s as good a shot as a Guardsman. Thankfully you can replace its guns with close combat weapons for free, so it’ll have 5 attacks. That’s 6 on the charge, meaning it’ll hit 3 Marines, and kill two. All that for 150 points! What a bargain. And by bargain I mean ‘complete waste of time’.

Next up is the Dark Angel Rhino, now with added spikes to make it ‘Chaos’. 15 point Extra Armour never looked so good!

Next up is the Dark Angel Predator, also with lots of spikes. And 60 point Lascannons that it can’t fire on the move. GW, you sure know how to make a crap rule set…

The Land Raider is… well... it’s a Land Raider.

Chaos Vindicator. I think armies with 3 of these things, Possessed, will make for a scary force. This is also supposed to appease us Iron Warrior players for taking away all our rules. Wonder what the Word Bearer players get? Fancy new Daemon rules? Well, as it happens…


Page 61-63:

I’m skipping ahead a little here, because it’s time to discuss the single greatest tragedy with the Chaos Codex. No folks, I’m not talking about the author, I’m talking about the section entitled ‘Summoned Daemons’.

We’ll start with a quote from the fluff in this section:

‘Some Daemons are weak, flittering things created from base emotions, but with little personality or direction’ – Codex: When Good Marines Go Bad, Page 61.

I must say, ne’er a truer word has been spoken in a GW rulebook.

The Daemons in this Codex, both ‘Greater’ and ‘Lesser’ (although I’d argue that a more accurate description for both types would be ‘Less Than’) truly have ‘little personality’. And if we’re talking about the ‘base emotions’ that went into the design of these Daemons, I’d have to say that ‘boredom’ and ‘laziness’ would be my chief candidates.

Sitting in front of me now I have a very old Games Workshop rulebook. Most of you here will probably have only heard of it, and chances are the closest you’ll ever get to seeing it is in a small thumbnail picture in an eBay auction. I am of course talking about one of the Realms of Chaos books – ancient tomes from which so much current fluff has been pilfered over the years. In this case it is the Slaves to Darkness book, the one detailing Khornate and Slaaneshi forces. This book goes into great detail about different types of Daemons, the nature of Khorne and Slaanesh, and includes rules that have ludicrous amounts of detail – there is a D1000 table in here, I kid you not. This book contains the first ever rules for the Inquisitors of the Ordo Malleus, a new weapon called the Psycannon, and the Grey Knights army list. It also contains army lists for Black Legion, World Eaters and Emperor’s Children.

The book is insane. Bloodthirsters used to carry big axes that contained within them another Bloodthirster, who could pop out during the game. They cost 900 or so points of course, so it made sense. There were Fiends, and Daemonettes, Flesh Hounds and Juggernauts. There were rules for Daemon Princes that make the last Codex look like a ‘colour by numbers’ children’s book. As I said, this book is insane.

Now let’s jump back to the new Chaos Codex. What have we got?

Greater Daemons.

Lesser Daemons.

That’s it.

Admittedly, Greater Daemons do have a nice statline, and at 100 points they are an absolute steal, but these rules are supposed to represent all Greater Daemons, from Bloodthirsters to Keepers of Secrets, from Great Unclean Ones to Lords of Change.

It’s just wrong.

Does it not sicken anyone here that Games Workshop has seen fit to publish three different sets of Terminator Teleportation rules for three different Codex Astartes-following Space Marine Chapters (Ultras, Imp Fists, Dark Angels), yet there isn’t enough difference in their minds between a Bloodthirster and a Lord of Change to warrant even a different statline!!!

And then there’s the Lesser Daemons. This section represents:

Nurglings
Plague Bearers
Bloodletters
Flesh Hounds
Horrors
Flamers
Screamers
Daemonettes
Daemonette Cavalry
Furies

And how are these wonderful, characterful, colourful and completely and utterly unique units represented in this new Chaos Codex?

A 13 point model with WS4 S4 T4 A2, Fearlessness and a 5+ Invulnerable save. They’re Fearless Space Marine Scouts with +1A, a lesser saving throw, and no weapons. I can imagine every Word Bearer player going mad right now, Emperor’s Children players wondering what they’re going to do with all their Daemonettes, and players with bases of Nurglings thinking what to do with their pint-sized Daemons that now have the same rules as their friend’s Screamers and Horrors.

This section, more than the heavily and needlessly simplified rules, more than the complete lack of variety or flavour in the rest of the list, and more than the nonsensical pricing structure of limited upgrades – more than anything really – epitomises exactly what is wrong with not only the Codex, but the mindset of the bumbling buffoons writing it.

After reading pages 61-63 of the new Chaos Codex, I am left with only two words to say to Mr. Thorpe, Mr. Cavatore and Mr. Johnson:


F#%k. You.


This section is an insult to Chaos players. It is a directed attack levelled at the people who have been playing Chaos for years and those of us with hordes of different types of Daemons – expensive, metal Daemon models, I might add. I don’t care that in 6 months to 3 years we’ll be getting a ‘Daemons Codex’. That doesn’t change anything. This Codex was bad to begin with, but it collapses under the weigh of its own blandness and stupidity with this section.

Ok, enough about these so-called Daemons, let’s get back to where we were.

Pages 46-59:

This is the special character section. I love this section, if only because we get a decent amount of fluff about our beloved cliché characters, and a nice expansion on Mr. Huron Blackheart, the star of this show.

Starting with Abaddon, and straight away we can see that someone at GW said to themselves ‘Y’know, for being the master of all Chaos, Abby kinds sucks’. And then they went and gave him a huge 275 point price tag, and rules to match! Abby is just nuts! I am so stealing every word of his rules for my Abaddon entry in our group’s 40K Revisited Project. Reading these rules made me actually think ‘Yes, I’d use Abby with these rules’ for the first time ever. Not even his 2nd Ed Rules were this good.

So what are they?

Well, let’s start with the three things that stand out the most: WS7, S8, I6. Yes, you read that correctly. He’s swinging an S8 power weapon at I6, using a WS of 7. He has 4 base attacks, +D6 from the sword. He can re-roll failed To Wound rolls with it. That’s re-rolling S8!! He’s got a 4+ Invulnerable Save. He’s immune to Instant Death. He’s Fearless, and he has a Teleport Homer.
He really is the Master of Chaos, and damn is it about time!

I dislike these emphasis on Special Characters within the more recent Codices. I really dislike it. But at least they’re giving us some characters that are worth a damn. Abby is great! Apparently in Apocalypse you can field multiple special characters. I own two Abaddons… so good!


Oddly, in comparison, our good friend Kharn is a little subdued. He’s still dangerous, yes, but he lost his immunity to Instant Death. He lost his 2+ armour save. He gained a pip of strength, and with F-Charge his WS7 S6 I6 with lots of attacks but he’s just… dull. Sure he went down in points, but I really don’t know why you’d bring him.


For all the 1KSons players out there, I have some good news for you:

Ahriman found a power weapon!!!

It seems that after all these millennia of swinging his Black Staff ineffectually at anyone with an armour save greater than a Guardsman, Ahriman realised that there was an ‘On’ switch at the base of the staff. Now he has a Force Weapon! He’s forgotten how to cast powers automatically, and for that alone I think his price increase to 250 probably isn’t worth it, but at least he can finally kill stuff! Sadly his fluff mentions that he is searching for a way to get into the Black Library and makes no mention of the fact that he found a way into the Eldar Webway during the 13th Black Crusade.


I was surprised to see that the Enhanced Marine rules of Fabius’ were still in the Codex. I thought that in a world of optionless squads and generic Daemons, something like the ability to enhance Marines would have been very quickly cut in favour of some stock-standard, optionless ‘enhanced retinue’ that only Fabius could get. But no, the rules remain. They’re still no good, and I doubt anyone has ever used them, but they’re there! Sadly, all is not well with the Chaos Primogenitor. His cost has gone up dramatically, he still hasn’t found the ‘On’ switch like Ahriman, so his weapon won’t be ignoring Gaunt or Ork armour anytime soon, his pistol still sucks, he lost his Invul save for a Feel No Pain save, and generally just became more of a confused fighter. I wouldn’t bother. But at least his Enhanced Marine rules are still there. They’re probably one of the more Chaotic things in this Codex.


Lucius the Eternally Useless remains so. He’s lost virtually all of his special rules. His WS and Initiative have increased, but he lost a pip of strength, his Lash of Torment is just a Tyranid Lash Whip. His cost went down, but not enough to justify ever taking him. Thank God he isn’t required to make Noise Marines into Troops…


Typhus went down a few points, and gained a Force Weapon. He’s actually pretty good. Not very exciting, but a decent character.


Finally the star of our show – Huron Blackheart, Master of the Red Corsairs, formerly Lufgt Huron, Chapter Master of the Astral Claws. Sadly, his actual rules are really uninspired. He’s a base-line Commander with a normal commander statline; he has a power fist, a power weapon and one psychic power. The only cool thing about him is that he has a heavy flamer. Really disappointing.

Thankfully we get quite a lot of fluff on the Badab War and other Huron related items. We get a two-page look at a raid Huron made on a Space Wolf Strike Cruiser. What the Space Wolves were doing all the way over in the lower Eastern Fringe, I do not know, but, again, the fluff is fun, so I like it.

So that’s the end of the rules section. Now we get the colour section.

Pages 64-80:

The colour section is very… colourful. Can’t really say much more than that except that I found it amusing the single picture of Iron Warriors has what would be 3 Heavy Support choices in the old Codex. Y’know, rather than 4. Heh.

Alpha Legion have changed colour schemes once again. They look really odd. A made-up ‘Renegade Chapter’ called The Cleaved gets more coverage than any of the Traitor Legions. There’s a conversion of Lysander, but with Lightning Claws. He’s part of a group called ‘The Purge’, and they get more coverage than any of the Traitor Legions.

The Red Corsair models look terrible. I’m sorry, but they’re half Red Space Marines, half Death Company. They don’t look good. The red is too bright.

Their Vindicator picture includes some riveting ‘detail’ shots including the hatch and the… air vent... umm… yeah. Really exciting stuff here. AIR VENTS!! WOOO!!!!!

There’s a 1500 point sample list that contains your usual mixed assortment of random weapon choices and mismatched units. It’s the typical, par-for-the-course crap that we’re used to from GW.

After that comes a jarring picture with lots of the stuff the Studio has just painted, giving us a Chaos Legion that must be from the Renegade ‘Colours of Benetton’ Chapter.

Yeah, and that’s the colour section.

Pages 81-88:

This is the section that Jervis decreed must be in all Codices so his son knows what’s what. Yes, it’s the wargear section, filled with lots of pretty pictures of Bolters with Spikes and huge canons with blade attachments. Thanks to this section we can all feel safe in the knowledge that Jervis’ 5 year old knows the difference between a Chainsword and a Reaper Autocannon.

Only thing of note is that Chaos Terminator Armour doesn’t give you +1 Attack, yet Space Marine Terminator Armour does. Go Loyalists! Oh, and anyone with wings can now Deep Strike. Page 87 does have a pretty nifty picture of a Chaos Dread.

Psychic Powers come at the end. Doom Bolt’s AP3 now. Warp Time is a lesser Veil of Time. Gift of Chaos is the same. Wind of Chaos is the same. Lash of Submission is the single most unfair thing in this Codex. Nurgle’s Rot sucks. Bolt of Change is AP1.


Pages 89-102:

And now we finally reach the army list. I’ve gone over most of what I feel about the units within the rules section that you can all flip back and forth between when you finally buy this train wreck of a Codex, but there are a few things here I’d like to point out, mostly to do with points and comparisons.

Daemon Princes, as everyone knows by now, have reverted back to the Daemon Princes from the really boring 1st Edition Chaos Codex from the start of 3rd Ed. They have only 3 options, Wings or no Wings, Mark or No Mark, and Lash of Submission or no Lash of Submission. That’s pretty much what it boils down to. Take two of ‘em.

All the Daemonic Gifts are gone in this Codex. Completely gone. Vanished. No show. The Chaos Lord still has loads of options, but they’re all weapon options, and they’re all extremely dull. Do I take one Lightning Claw or two? Terminator Armour or a Bike? Snore-fest or Nap-Time? The Marks are all ludicrously priced. 20 for +1T that doesn’t even help against Instant Death? 15 points to increase the Invul Save. Only Slaanesh is worthwhile, at 5 points for +1Init.

Sorcerer is up next. He’s got a Force Weapon, and has to take at least one power. Unlike Space Marine Librarians, Chaos Sorcerers have been working in the Eye of Terror for the Chaos Gods and therefore cannot get two ultra-cheap powers. Instead they have to pay 30 points for things like Wind of Chaos and Gift of Chaos. To get two powers, the Sorcerer needs to spend 30 points on the Mark of Tzeentch. Ouch…

This page also has the rules for Daemon Weapons. The normal one is bad. The Undivided one gives you +1A, the Khorne one makes it easier to kill yourself, the Nurgle One is useless except against Wraithlords and ‘Zilla lists, the Tzeentch one gives you a different way of killing yourself and the Slaanesh one is a super-force weapon without the need for a test. Overall the Slaaneshi one is the best. It causes more damage without increasing the chances of killing yourself. Still, for 40 points, what a waste… Daemon Princes cannot get Daemon Weapons. Go figure…

Chosen are still 18 points and still only have 1 attack each. They can get a single Champion, who appears to have no options of his own, so when it says up to 4 in the squad may take certain items, I’d have to assume he is one of those four. So, effectively, you pay +10 points for an extra attack. Otherwise everything else is already available to the squad, including 15 point power weapons and 25 point power fists. Rip off…

Chaos Termies are cheap at 30 points. Anyone can be a Champ. They adhere strictly to the Codex Astartes though, so only one heavy weapon for every full 5 Termies. It’s good to be Chaotic!

Possessed are 26 points each, and as mentioned earlier in this review, you cannot plan at all what they will do during the game, making them impossible to use. Thankfully they can get a Rhino…

The Dread, yeah, already mentioned. Avoid! Avoid! Avoid! Wait for a shiny plastic kit in 6-10 years, and then we’ll get good rules again.

Now we come to Chaos Marine Squads. I truly do not know why you’d take Chaos Marines. It’s 170 points for a squad with a Lascannon. The Icons are priced so that you won’t take them (50 for the Nurgle one for God’s sake, and you don’t even get FNP!). The Cult Troops are just so much better. Avoid these jokers. It seems that Chaos Marines have no place in a Chaos Marine army…

Also, when I see ‘Mark of Chaos Glory’, I see ‘Mark of Morning Glory’. I can’t take them seriously any more.

For 50 points you can have a Rhino with Extra Armour or for 55 points you can have a possessed Rhino. Unfortunately you can no longer ‘fake’ a Razorback with two combi-weapons and a Havoc Launcher. Now you get your Combi-Bolter and one other option. What does GW have against options?

Plague Marines are 23 points each, and whilst good I just see Noise Marines as the superior unit due to cost. The Champ’s Power Fist is also 25… such a rip off.

140 points gets you 5 Fearless Noise Marines with a Blastmaster. 40 points is still overpriced.

Berzerkers are cheap as chips at 21 points each. They’re nice.

1KSons I’ve been over. Sorc has a Force Weapon. All you 1KSons players out there better start removing those power fists from your Champions.

Chaos Bikers have gone down by one point, and lost an attack. I guess the lack of new model means they got ignored. They really suck now with base A1 rather than A2.

Chaos Raptors, as I’ve said, are now just Loyalist Assault Marines but with access to Plasma Guns and Meltaguns. They can have Icons, but they’re so overpriced you wouldn’t bother.

Spawn are 40 points each. With no armour save you wouldn’t bother.

Havocs, unlike their Loyalist counter-parts, cannot get Tank Hunters. They pay stupid prices for their guns as usual and… and this made me laugh… can buy an Icon of Khorne. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That’s hilarious.

I’ve been over Oblits.

Chaos Predator with lotsa Lascannons costs 20 points more than the old version. It’s not a better shot, it’s no more mobile, and it’s no more durable. Nothing’s changed, much like GW’s writing abilities. Oh, you can get Possession and lose a point of Ballistic Skill if you like. Good one Gav.

Vindi is 125. Possession makes it 145. Bring on the trios of Vindis!

Defiler is 150. No more indirect. Bad statline, more CCWs. What a waste. Seriously, who honestly thought that giving the Defiler a few extra attacks and Fleet yet keeping the Defiler at WS3 would make it into a HTH monster? It misses MEQs half the damn time. How is that useful?

Land Raider is still 40 points too expensive. Possessing it might be a good idea, as you don’t lose to much – all the guns are twin-linked anyway.

And the less said about Generic Daemons the better.

Page 104:

This is the summary page. I only mention this as it contains the full credits at the bottom. It has a few interesting things.

Written By: Gav Thorpe
Additional Text: Alessio Cavatore

What’s that? Alessio did ‘additional text’. What does that mean? I guess he showed up at the office each day, and between his half an hour coffee break and 3 hour lunch he looked over Gav’s shoulder, shook his head and thought to himself ‘Maybe I’ll fix it before we go to print… or maybe I’ll just take a 4 hour lunch today’.

The other interesting thing about the credits is not something that’s written there, but something that’s not written there. What’s missing?

Jervis’ name.

He’s not even mentioned in the special thanks section. Actually, I assume the special thanks section is Gav saying thankyou to all those people for not firing him years ago after he wrote the 3rd Ed Blood Angel Codex.

So yeah, Jervis is actually not mentioned at all in this book. Funny how things happen.


Conclusion:

I titled this review ‘An Exercise in Futility’ not so much because of the content of this particular Codex, but more as a commentary on GW at the moment. What we all have to realise is that despite the good rules in this Codex, and despite the ‘fun’ fluff that I enjoyed quite a bit, nothing we do or say will make GW change their current trend.

Options will vanish. Variety will go out the window. Entire armies will be invalidated or heavily nerfed, all despite the long-forgotten promises before 4th Ed that ‘nothing would change’. And we can’t do squat about it… sorry… I mentioned Squats. Pun… let’s say it was intended.

Think of this part of 40K’s development history as the Ecclesiarchy’s Reign of Blood. Maybe Rick Priestly will come back to play out the role of Sebastian Thor to Jervis’ Lord Vandire. We can only hope!!!

So your three options are keep playing, stop playing, or do what our group has done and re-write 40K to make it into a game we have fun playing.

As for this Codex, well, as I said, it’s a train wreck. It’s so full of… blandness… that it makes me sad. The Legions are gone – in fact, they’re hardly mentioned. The Horus Heresy plays a supporting role in this Chaos Codex. The Daemons are an insult. The points costs don’t make sense. The list itself is dull.

We spent a lot of time making fun of Pete Haines, but the truth is I miss him. He might have demonstrated the subtlety of an Imperator Titan when he made his personal Iron Warrior army awesome and 1KSons suck, but he made a Codex that we all enjoyed. Yes, it could be abused. Yes, it was near impossible to balance. But damn it, it was fun. Having a page of tiny, 3-columned text for the Wargear section was fun. Having all those options and all those Legions was fun.

This new Codex isn’t fun, and truly fun is what 40K is about. If a Codex is no fun, it is a failure.

Lord Vandire – you have failed.

BYE

Cover-2-Cover Reviews...

Pretty soon I'm going to post one of what I like to call 'Commissar Calgar's Cover-2-Cover Reviews'. I intend to put these out for each of GW's big products, the next of which is the Apocalypse rulebook.

The first one I will post however is my Cover-2-Cover Chaos Codex review, a review that started the most viewed, longest and fastest growing thread in all of Dakka's recent history. We made it to some 50 pages with several thousand responces. It was almost like posting at Warseer, but with out the disparity of noise to signal.

So that'll be up soon! :)

Units 101 Spot

Hey there, and welcome to Units 101 Spot - where we bring you some of the units from the world of 40K and discuss the particular strengths and weaknesses of the unit, as well as great ways to use or destroy it. Personally, I love looking at the lesser used/bought units from the various codicies out there, and then working out the best way to use them.

The first unit we will look at in Units 101 spot will be a little used and almost never seen unit from the Dark Eldar Codex - Mandrakes.

Mandrakes stats are the same as regular DE Warriors. and at 15 points apiece, compared to the Warrior's base cost of 8 points, it can be understood why Dark Eldar players are wary of taking them. The unit also can't get any of the lovely upgrades from the Armory list, meaning that the unit can't even get any of the brutal firepower or combat shredding weapons available to other units, such as agonisers or shredders.

So why take Mandrakes at all?

Firstly, like a lot of the DE army, a substantial part of its power comes from the special rules inherent to the unit. Shadow-skinned gives the unit a permanent 5+ cover save, even in the open. This enables the unit to have a better chance of surviving incoming fire compared to the average Dark Eldar unit. Also, because this ability can combine with normal cover, it means that in normal terrain, the unit has a 3+ save - as good as a MEQ. In Citites of Death, this becomes a 2+ save - the unit becomes almost indestructable. Worth noting, especially if you know you have a COD game coming up.

Secondly, the unit has possibly the wierdest deployment rules in the game. Instead of deploying the unit as per normal, you put down three models in seperate locations anywhere within the players deployment zone. The unit is there but not there - any one of the three models can represent where the unit 'actually' is.

The three models can move 6" per turn, and can not affect or be effected by any enemy unit at all. The player has any of his phases up until the end of the third turn to choose which model represents where the squad 'actually' is, and deploy it, taking away the other two decoy models. Then, depending on the phase which the player deploys the unit, the unit can move, shoot and assault. This means that the opponent is never certain exactly where the unit will come on, and either have to cover all three models with suffecient force to tie the unit up, or allow the unit to potentially spring an ambush on him.

How to use Mandrakes -

Mandrakes have no options apart from how many you want in a unit. However, the special rules the unit has allow it to be incredibly flexible as to how you use it.

Tactic 1 - Spread the fear

Use this tactic against most forces, especially those which are split into a static fire element and a mobile or assault element : Deploy the three decoys reasonably evenly spaced across the board. Try to move the decoys around the flanks of his main force, or towards poorly supported units in the rear. Force the enemy to either try to send units to protect his flanks and rear, and therefore weaken his main force, or allow your Mandrakes to potentially assault vulnerable units (such as Fire Warriors, Devastators, Dark Reapers, IG Heavy Weapons teams, etc). This tactic gives the most flexibility to the player, and usually sows the most doubt and confusion.

Tactic 2 - Assassination

Use this tactic against armies which have expensive, roving IC's : Send the three models to try and get close to a roving IC and then assault and overwhelm it, such as an Etherial, Crisis commander, Farseer, basically anything short of a tooled up Chaos Lord or Grand Master. On a Farseer, a unit of 10 will put an average of 3.75 wounds, which equals 1 dead Farseer, and the units cost back straight away. It won't work as well against MEQ commanders, but can still be effective at tying up an expensive commander for a couple of turns.

Tactic 3 - Delay the surge

Use this tactic against armies which use multiple units and axis to assault your static shooting lines : Set up the decoys across the expected line of attack. Move them forward to near where you expect the enemy units to halt before they assault. Then pick one unit which you want to disrupt from assaulting, and make sure you get into combat with it. If it is a dedicated assault unit, then the Mandrakes will fall, but it will at least delay one unit for a turn or two, possibly two units if the enemy sends another in to charge the Mandrakes. This tactic can completely disrupt set piece assaults, or delay strategic units/areas from enemy assault.

Tactic 4 - Reserves

Use this tactic against armies which will use Deep Striking/Teleporting units within your own deployment zones : Set up your decoys evenly around your deployment zone to cover as much of it as possible. Try to wait for the enemy to Deep Strike into or near your own lines, then assault. Useful against shooting units. If nothing else, it will delay the opponents Deep Striking into or near your deployment zone unil turn 4.

How do I counter Mandrakes?

Countering Mandrakes is a difficult thing to do. Due to the fact that they can appear almost anywhere, it is hard to pin them down and wipe them out early. However, armies which have basic high armor values (MEQ's, Necrons) and mobile armies (Mech Eldar/Tau) can easily avoid most of the issues against Mandrakes if they want to - MEQ's because Mandrakes just can't do that much damage, and mechanised armies because they are mobile enough to avoid the Mandrakes, or at least limit the usefulness of them. However, the biggest issue of countering Mandrakes is utility - if you spend a lot of resources countering them, then you are neglecting a lot of other dangers from the rest of the Dark Eldar army, and if you don't counter them, then they can be rather disruptive to your battle plans.

However, there are some basic precautions you can use -

Keep close - Don't leave units just out there by themselves, especially if they are vulnerable to assault. Keep a small counter charge unit nearby your static firebase to rip the Mandrakes up in combat if you think it a danger. Don't leave your IC's out in vulnerable areas. It is just asking for trouble.

Be Alert but not Alarmed - Don't overvalue the power of Mandrakes. Know what they can do, and take relevant precaution, but don't change your gameplan because of them. Because a fair bit of Mandrakes value is tied up in threatening you as a player and your plans, not just your army. If you let it alter what you do too much, or become too cautious in executing your plans, then the Mandrakes have done their job. So be Alert, but not Alarmed.

Hopefully you enjoyed Units 101 Spot this week, stay tuned for more.

Hello all. Just making a quick post to say what a wonderful idea this is. Now I can publically castigate the morons at GW, and not be censored by the mods at Dakka for it.

Yay!

Tactics 101 Spot

As the groups designated ‘tester’, I probably play the largest variety of armies about – mainly due to the fact that I have neither the patience nor finances to fully collect and play a proper sized army. Along the way, I have learnt many, many things about how to play (and how not to play!) radically different armies. And so I’m going to start a series of (hopefully) concise and helpful Tactics 101 posts to help people out there with their gaming and model purchases.

And so we come to part 1: Know thy Army

Pretty self explanatory, isn’t it? But this aspect is often overlooked by players. Basically, you have to know both how your army and general Codex work.

1 – As a player, you have to know what each unit is and does - everything from statlines to special abilities to weaponry and wargear options. Often people suffer because they forget certain abilities or rules which could alter the course of the game. So if your unit has furious charge, then remember it, either by printing out unit stat lines with your army list or by referring to the codex whenever you use the unit. This is especially important when you have just started to use an army, though it can also benefit experienced gamers too. Even the rules difference between something that looks like the same thing – such as Deep Strike and Teleportation - can be very tricky, and certain rules have the same names in different Codices but work differently! So make sure you know your rules, and if in doubt, ask someone (preferably someone who doesn’t have a personal interest if you are in the middle of playing a game).

2 – As a player, you also have to know what each unit is capable of – is the unit fast or normal or slow? Does it have other movement options? Does it need to be supported by other units? Is it tough or weak, flexible or role specific, expensive or cheap? Can this model/unit be used against other multiple opponents, or is it only good against one or two lists? You have to know exactly what you have to be able to use it in a proper manner.

3 – As a player, you also need to know the relative value of the units you are taking to work out force org utility – for units are not only competing on points value to be included in your army, but also often on Force Org slots. Sometimes you have to compare Fast Attack/Elites/Heavy Support choices against one another and find which gives you the maximum benefit towards your intended army composition. And that leads us to the next point, which is

4 – As a player, you have to have an idea of what sort of army you want to make! Just picking units at random or without good reason is a way to get crushed. An army has to work as an interlocking whole, rather than a collection of individuals.
So if you are creating a shooting army with counter assault capability, make sure the units you choose assist in reaching this composition - and make sure you stick by your plan, both within your army as a whole, and within the units themselves. Otherwise, you'll end up in a muddle of confusion, and you won't be able to game your army the way you intended. So if you are picking a rapid assault army, then don't get bogged down by picking slow units without any way of getting to the combat. If you are a static army, don't mount everything in transports, etc etc. If you want a balanced tournament list, then don't only just take single shot AP3 weapons.

The same applies to units themselves - if you are going to take a unit that is primarily close combat oriented, then don’t give it heavy weapons that it won’t be able to use. If you are going to give a unit long ranged weapons, then adding flamers or thunder hammers may not be the best use of the slot. There are always circumstances where such choices could come in handy, but they are the exceptions, not the rule. Every unit choice has to build up towards that overall design of an army.

5 – As a player, you need to be able to think. War is intellect, and on the field of battle no plan ever survives the first engagement with the enemy. Your opponent is going to try and trick and fool you, avoid your strengths and capitalize on your weaknesses, convince you that you have lost. You need to make sure that you are constantly assessing both your overall tactics on how you intend to use your army in light of where you are at the moment, and where you can reasonably plan to be! And importantly, you also have to think of the best way to both realize your objectives, and stop the opponent from realizing theirs. Constantly analyze where you are in relation to your objectives, and how best to achieve them. And make sure that that you stay on the ball – I have seen people lose from carelessness when they thought the game was already over.

6 – As a player, you need to be able to learn. If you win, work out why – sometimes you didn’t play well to win, rather the opponent just played worse than you did, or the probability god’s were on your side. Did you outsmart your opponents? Were there combinations of units/actions that were decisive or essential to your win?

If you lose, work out why – were you just unlucky? Outsmarted? Outplayed? Were there units which didn’t live up to their points costs, or relative value? Why? Because you didn’t use them correctly, or because they were outfitted poorly, or do they just suck? Was it just this particular opponent’s army that you would struggle against, or would you struggle against many opponents/Codices with this particular force?

When you have figured out why, then you can go back to the drawing board and improve your army, and improve yourself as a general!

This is the end of Tactics 101 part 1. Hopefully you enjoyed it. Next week – Know thy Enemy and Probability and You – why more dice are better.